or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple may license AirPlay video streaming to third-party HDTV makers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple may license AirPlay video streaming to third-party HDTV makers - Page 2

post #41 of 91
Just to be clear, AirPlay as it exists to day, may not be ideal for someone giving an interactive presentation -- as opposed to just playing a video or slide show.

When you AirPlay something, the sender does not see what is playing on the sending display (the iPad). There is a very limited amount of interaction controlled by the iPad:
-- flip slide
-- Play/Pause
-- Done


When you attach an iPad directly to an HDTV via The HDMI adapter, you see what is playing on the iPad display, as well as on the HDTV. You have more control -- e.g. in a KeyNote Preso you can see notes and the next slides, etc., which do not appear on the HDTV.


Erica Sadun was experimenting with AirPlay (and wrote some apps for the Mac). According to her, the [then iPad 1] hardware was not robust enough to concurrently display the content on both the Sending iPad and the Receiving ATV or Mac.

It would be great if the iPad 2 could use AirPlay similar to a direct-connected iPad to a HDTV.


One other thing to note: an iPad or iPhone (or a Mac) can initiate an AirPlay connection -- but, the initiating device need not participate in the connection or provide the AirPlayed content.

For example you could have an iTunes server with all your A/V content -- an iPad or iP4 (or Mac) could initiate an iTunes Server AirPlay connection to, say, an ATV, another iPad, etc. Then, the instigator goes on to do other things while the AirPlay receiver sucks content from the AirPlay sender.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #42 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

.

Whoa...

This could be Huge!

.

I totally agree.
post #43 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Having to replace your TV isn't a choice, just a matter of time.

Yes, but what we're talking about is adding AirPlay functionality to existing TVs as cheaply as possible. If you like, we don't have to call it a dongle, we could call it AppleTV Mini.

Again, if the choice is between having to replace your TV to get AirPlay or being able to get a cheap add-on, I don't think most people are going to object to the add-on.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #44 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Yes, I did also say Apple would make their own TV. I still believe that. It would suit them as a company. They'd make an awesome TV and people would buy it. And if you couldn't afford the Apple Branded TV you could always go for the second best option of getting an Airplay enabled TV from many-another manufacturer.

It makes little sense to me. I can see how it might work / look and its a sexy idea but I just don't think Apple is interested in making TV's. They are interested in connecting to TV's through something like the ATV but Apple TV sets? I'd love one, for sure but like I said, I can't see that the idea would be exciting enough for Apple to get into.

The idea of licensing AirPlay makes good sense, however. If they do I bet ATV sales will increase dramatically, too. This is where you'd see the halo effect, for sure.
post #45 of 91
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #46 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Except if I was Apple I would convince the manufacturers that putting the whole Apple TV inside their set (only marginally bigger), was a better idea.

If every new TV just came with Apple TV inside, even from a single manufacturer, it would take off like a rocket.

That was my original idea for Apple owning the HEC*, when a technology like AirPlay seemed like it was science-fiction and Apple hasn't mentioned any SoCs they've designed in-house. Now that they've done that I can see simply selling the SoC to be one dedicated input. That doesn't exclude the option for Apple to license the entire AppleTV setup as a single package I just described, but since Apple has been adamantly against livensing their OS in any way, shape or form I have to think the most likely route would be to license AirPlay, which I also assume would allow FairPlay DRM passthrough via AirPlay streaming.


* They already own the "living room" in the more literal sense, just not the HEC portion of it.
post #47 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

There’s an App[leTV] for that.

Wouldn't it be sweet irony if Apple provided AirPlay to HDTV through licensing, a dongle or a plug-in adapter and would thus become the high-profit component of a very low-margin industry.


Go for it Apple! Yea!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #48 of 91
We were talking about getting Airplay for existing televisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Except if I was Apple I would convince the manufacturers that putting the whole Apple TV inside their set (only marginally bigger), was a better idea.

If every new TV just came with Apple TV inside, even from a single manufacturer, it would take off like a rocket.
post #49 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Wouldn't it be sweet irony if Apple provided AirPlay to HDTV through licensing, a dongle or a plug-in adapter and would thus become the high-profit component of a very low-margin industry.


Go for it Apple! Yea!

When Apple first premiered AirPlay I think we discussed a VGA adapter for projectors that would allow corporate and classroom use without the need of the inelegant WiFi router + full AppleTV just to get AirPlay access.

I think this rumour holds water becuause Apple has a history of doing this sort of thing; bypassing intermediate solutions that we want now in order to setup some farsighted solution. Throw in the profit they could make from the licensing, especially if it allows FairPlay over Airplay and you not only have a good profit center, but a reinforcing of Apple's two biggest profit centers (of 2011), the iPad and iPhone.
post #50 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Bullshit.

Were you agreeing with Solipsism by giving him a much more concise version of your actions...
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #51 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Ping is probably taking off faster that we think, in an under-the-radar way. I know its anecdotal, but my teenager just asked join because many in the social circle are on it. I noticed, for instance, that a band such as Metallica already has hundreds of thousands of followers.

That's the funny thing. I'm not quite sure how everyone in the tech industry knows Ping is a failure, apart from "I don't use it, therefore it has failed." I wouldn't be surprised that Ping has tens of millions of users (who aren't us) and I doubt that's a failure.
post #52 of 91
Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #53 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

I agree that would be ideal, although of course it would be up to the set manufacturers to actually take Apple up on the licensing.

And the biggest of them, Samsung, apparently has plans of its own for digital future, so it might be tough to get them to go along.

On the other hand, if Panasonic or LG or some of the cheaper brands (I'm leaving out Sony because, well, you know, they're Sony) were to offer Apple TV functionality at not much of a premium over their existing sets (and I would think getting rid of the case and power supply and ports would shave some off the cost) and that proved to be hugely popular and a reason to buy something other than a Samsung set, that might be a strong incentive for Samsung to get on board.

Really, I think the rapidly expanding ubiquity of iOS devices would make a licensed baked-in Apple TV a huge advantage for TV manufacturers. I know Android/Google TV wants in on this, but they're going way overboard with complexity and cost. This would be a great time for Apple to start cutting some deals and becoming firmly entrenched in the fabled living room.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #54 of 91
I don't think Sony or Samsung are motivated to directly assist in the dominance of iTunes.

Airplay is an easier sell because anyone can use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.
post #55 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

They are more likely to stick a dock connector on Apple TV than license out the guts.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #56 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

Yeah!

I wonder how much cost is in the case, power supply/cord, packaging, etc.


... Then, there is the other shoe-- not only can the ATV-enabled-HDTV AirPlay content from millions of iDevices, but it will be able to play apps and games on the HDTV with the iDevice as the game controller.

I can envision multiplayer games, educational and collaboration apps running on the ATV/HDTV and the iDevices providing the play -- including 3rd-party devices like the WII-mote.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #57 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Licensing AirPlay makes vastly more sense than building TVs.

Agreed not that I ever thought Apple would as I'm sure you didn't either.
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, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
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, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #58 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I agree that would be ideal, although of course it would be up to the set manufacturers to actually take Apple up on the licensing.

And the biggest of them, Samsung, apparently has plans of its own for digital future, so it might be tough to get them to go along.

On the other hand, if Panasonic or LG or some of the cheaper brands (I'm leaving out Sony because, well, you know, they're Sony) were to offer Apple TV functionality at not much of a premium over their existing sets (and I would think getting rid of the case and power supply and ports would shave some off the cost) and that proved to be hugely popular and a reason to buy something other than a Samsung set, that might be a strong incentive for Samsung to get on board.

Really, I think the rapidly expanding ubiquity of iOS devices would make a licensed baked-in Apple TV a huge advantage for TV manufacturers. I know Android/Google TV wants in on this, but they're going way overboard with complexity and cost. This would be a great time for Apple to start cutting some deals and becoming firmly entrenched in the fabled living room.

You hit on the nut of it... The user does not want to surf the Internet on the HDTV -- Rather he wants to surf the internet on his iPad.

Then, when he finds something of interest (to all) -- he wants to AirPlay it from the Internet, through the iPad to the AHDTV.


See, how I did that -- coined a new acronym Apple HDTV.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #59 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Yes, but what we're talking about is adding AirPlay functionality to existing TVs as cheaply as possible. If you like, we don't have to call it a dongle, we could call it AppleTV Mini.

That world you are describing is the world we are already living in. And the add-on is called the Apple TV.

The whole point of building it in at $4 a pop is all new TV's end up having it by default. You don't even need to understand how it works. You don't have to buy anything and still, it just works. Yes you have to buy a new TV, but I prefer that clean-cut scenario. That way "everyone" has it, eventually. An Apple Television is a slightly different matter and would be a product category onto itself, at least for a while.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #60 of 91
My thesis on this rumor is that it's the beginning of an Apple Inside strategy, whereby Apple licenses the skin, bones and brain of Apple TV to TV set makers as part of their ubiquity play in the living room.

Why? The alternative for Apple is building their own TV, which has lots of downside; namely, a commodity product in an entrenched ecosystem (cable/sat, set-top box, broadcast, HBO, movies, CE) on a device that lacks the product obsolescence lifecycle that Apple tunes its R&D for (i.e., people keep TVs 10+ years).

At the same time, Apple can not NOT own the living room, given the piece parts they have assembled to fuel the digital media lifestyle. It's too strategic for them.

I ruminate on this topic further here:

The Magic Adapter: Apple TV and the Battle for the Living Room
http://oreil.ly/gIShlK

Check it out, if interested.

Best,

Mark
post #61 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

Now there's an original idea.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #62 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

That world you are describing is the world we are already living in. And the add-on is called the Apple TV.

The whole point of building it in at $4 a pop is all new TV's end up having it by default. You don't even need to understand how it works. You don't have to buy anything and still, it just works. Yes you have to buy a new TV, but I prefer that clean-cut scenario. That way "everyone" has it, eventually. An Apple Television is a slightly different matter.

There is a possibility for a tweener -- simple and inexpensive...

Think of it as an ATV thumb drive for your HDTV.

The HDMI spec provides: Pin 18\t+5 V Power (max 50 mA) -- IDK if this is is enough to power an ATV dongle without any external power source (ideal).
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #63 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Apple should license the entire guts of Apple TV and make it standard in every HDTV.

Very good idea. But not with the current wreck that passes off for a 'tv remote.' That device has to be re-imagined before Apple would agree to go along.
post #64 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypermark View Post

My thesis on this rumor is that it's the beginning of an Apple Inside strategy, whereby Apple licenses the skin, bones and brain of Apple TV to TV set makers as part of their ubiquity play in the living room.

Why? The alternative for Apple is building their own TV, which has lots of downside; namely, a commodity product in an entrenched ecosystem (cable/sat, set-top box, broadcast, HBO, movies, CE) on a device that lacks the product obsolescence lifecycle that Apple tunes its R&D for (i.e., people keep TVs 10+ years).

At the same time, Apple can not NOT own the living room, given the piece parts they have assembled to fuel the digital media lifestyle. It's too strategic for them.

I ruminate on this topic further here:

The Magic Adapter: Apple TV and the Battle for the Living Room
http://oreil.ly/gIShlK

Check it out, if interested.

Best,

Mark

Good read, Mark!


There are some interesting possibilities here.

Apple need not charge for the license -- rather, they could just source the SOC/POP -- currently the A4 CPU.

As these are currently manufactured by Sammy -- I suspect they wouldn't mind including them in New SammyTVs.

If Apple can make AirPlay ubiquitous, then all the TV mfgrs. will include it in their New HDTVs.

It is not unusual for large companies to compete at some levels, while collaborate at other levels.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #65 of 91
So we get a rumour that Apple might license AirPlay. This isn’t some out of left field rumour, it’s fairly vanilla in all aspects and makes a lot of sense. Meaning, it helps promote the sales of their most profitable segments and helps solidify their growth and dominance. They also have a history of actions that support what this rumour proposes.

Yet somehow there is a jump from licensing AirPlay to vendors to this meaning they will put an AppleTV in every TV. This sounds like the thinking that made the GoogleTV the failure it turned out to be. I can see an AppleTV being possibly integrated or used an add-on component sometime in the future, but so far that hasn’t worked out so well.
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 #66 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

You hit on the nut of it... The user does not want to surf the Internet on the HDTV -- Rather he wants to surf the internet on his iPad.

Then, when he finds something of interest (to all) -- he wants to AirPlay it from the Internet, through the iPad to the AHDTV.


See, how I did that -- coined a new acronym Apple HDTV.

.

I can see Apple getting the premium brands and cheapest (store) brands on board with licensing AirPlay. That should be enough to push toward a desirable feature and then to a required feature. Holds outs (assumption: Sony) would really have no choice but to compete by including AirPlay support.

I can see Apple eventually releasing an SDK and App Store for the AppleTV to further push the AppleTV to new levels, but likely with an iDevice as the primary input for doing any complex computing for a HEC appliance.

This would allow more interconnectivity between your iDevices and your TV, but for simply streaming various types of media to a TV or projector the AirPlay option will be sufficient. It could also offer halo effect to those who enjoy using AirPlay that came with their TV but want to push that experience even farther.
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 #67 of 91
I curious if anyone has any idea how much of the Apple TV tech is required for AirPlay. What with the WiFi bits, necessary UI, and enough CPU/RAM to handle the streaming, I would guess most of it? That is, I doubt the Netflix and YouTube clients or iPhoto slide show effects are taking up too much silicon.

So anything that can do AirPlay is well on its way to being able to host full blown AppleTV functionality, I would think.

So that's why I wonder about "just" licensing AirPlay. You get the TV manufacturers to put the necessary hardware/software on board to handle AirPlay, you're just some code away from an AppleTV on board, which seems like a difficult proposition to resist-- for both Apple and the TV folk.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #68 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


You seem make some wild claim of what will be and then later when something less monumental but more elegant comes along you claim that is what you meant.

Well, in defense of Ireland, he was the biggest proponent of Apple making a tablet that AI had. He may not have nailed the implementation (hell, no one did) but he saw where that puck was going...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #69 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

Well, in defense of Ireland, he was the biggest proponent of Apple making a tablet that AI had. He may not have nailed the implementation (hell, no one did) but he saw where that puck was going...

I think petty much every regular on these forums (except him) said they would leverage iOS for a tablet, not Mac OS. Making the same foolish assumption that a desktop OS on designed for a mouse pointer when your fingers are the primary input is not going to where the puck will be, its going to where the puck had been for a very, very long time.
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 #70 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So we get a rumour that Apple might license AirPlay. This isn’t some out of left field rumour, it’s fairly vanilla in all aspects and makes a lot of sense. Meaning, it helps promote the sales of their most profitable segments and helps solidify their growth and dominance. They also have a history of actions that support what this rumour proposes.

Yet somehow there is a jump from licensing AirPlay to vendors to this meaning they will put an AppleTV in every TV. This sounds like the thinking that made the GoogleTV the failure it turned out to be. I can see an AppleTV being possibly integrated or used an add-on component sometime in the future, but so far that hasn’t worked out so well.

Hate to burst everyones bubble (especially mine)...

But I think that in order to do AirPlay, you need most of the bits inside the ATV 2 -- maybe not as much or as powerful bits... but most all the bits.

Here is a list of the parts cost of the ATV 2:

iSuppli Teardown Reveals Apple TV’s Inner iPad

With a total cost of $64. There's not enough that can be removed to get to $4 a pop.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #71 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Hate to burst everyones bubble (especially mine)...

But I think that in order to do AirPlay, you need most of the bits inside the ATV 2 -- maybe not as much or as powerful bits... but most all the bits.

Here is a list of the parts cost of the ATV 2:

iSuppli Teardown Reveals Apple TVs Inner iPad

With a total cost of $64. There's not enough that can be removed to get to $4 a pop.

But the iPod Touch and AppleTV are pretty much the same device, too, at the core. I still wouldnt say the iPod Touch is necessary to make an AppleTV or vice versa. At this point I think Apple wouldnt use their AppleTV UI for any licensing of AirPlay. I think theyd use the bare minimum to let you stream from your AirPlay-compatible transmitter to an AirPlay-compatible receiver.

Unless they can get enough money to offset the profit of the AppleTV without fear of losing some stronghold further down the road I dont see the full AppleTV interface being incorporated, but Id love to hear an argument as to why that is how that is the case.
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 #72 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

But the iPod Touch and AppleTV are pretty much the same device, too, at the core. I still wouldnt say the iPod Touch is necessary to make an AppleTV or vice versa. At this point I think Apple wouldnt use their AppleTV UI for any licensing of AirPlay. I think theyd use the bare minimum to let you stream from your AirPlay-compatible transmitter to an AirPlay-compatible receiver.

Unless they can get enough money to offset the profit of the AppleTV without fear of losing some stronghold further down the road I dont see the full AppleTV interface being incorporated, but Id love to hear an argument as to why that is how that is the case.

See my post above. Once you've enabled AirPlay, you're all but AppleTV ready (as far as I can make out). So the only hurdle would be Apple's willingness to sign off.

So that cuts into aTV sales, but look at the tradeoff-- a vast expansion of the iTunes ecosystem, a huge selling point for iOS devices. If Apple got enough TV manufacturers on board, and kept the add-on premium low enough (say well under $100, which, for a modern $1000 big flat screen isn't much of a deal breaker) they abruptly become a major player in the streaming media space.

That seems like a pretty good deal for Apple, to me, against some modest loss of revenue from standalone aTV sales.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #73 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think petty much every regular on these forums (except him) said they would leverage iOS for a tablet, not Mac OS. Making the same foolish assumption that a desktop OS on designed for a mouse pointer when your fingers are the primary input is not going to where the puck will be, its going to where the puck had been for a very, very long time.

Ireland never ever ever said the tablet would use a desktop OS. Ever. Mouse pointer? You are mad.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #74 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

See my post above. Once you've enabled AirPlay, you're all but AppleTV ready (as far as I can make out). So the only hurdle would be Apple's willingness to sign off.

So that cuts into aTV sales, but look at the tradeoff-- a vast expansion of the iTunes ecosystem, a huge selling point for iOS devices. If Apple got enough TV manufacturers on board, and kept the add-on premium low enough (say well under $100, which, for a modern $1000 big flat screen isn't much of a deal breaker) they abruptly become a major player in the streaming media space.

That seems like a pretty good deal for Apple, to me, against some modest loss of revenue from standalone aTV sales.

Apple could have licensed FairPlay years ago to vendors of all sorts of devices and get paid from each and every one of those devices that were sold. They also could have licensed their OS to other PC vendors. They dont do it because it hurts their HW sales and weakens their brand.

I think this would be have the same taste in their mouth. The AppleTV is no longer a product, but a feature of some 3rd-partys product. I dont think Apple wants that.. but they do want to make money, hence licensing AirPlay to strengthen their iDevice hold and use a way to push even more people into the AppleTVs which will be even more useful once and SDK and App Store appears.

This last one might never happen, but I have to think the amount of NAND that equals the Restore Stick on a MBA for holding iOS is a bit excessive just to keep it as is. I can also see the AppleTV being updated yearly or every two years with newer HW that will take advantage of the newer HW.
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 #75 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Ireland never ever ever said the tablet would use a desktop OS. Ever. Mouse pointer? You are mad.

1) Talking about yourself in the 3rd person is odd.

2) Repost your mockups that copy/pasted Mac OS on your tablet and Ill try to located all those threads where you told me I was wrong for saying it wouldnt use Mac OS, but leverage iPhone OS and how you adamnetly denied that was possible because it would then be useless.
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 #76 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Good read, Mark!


There are some interesting possibilities here.

Apple need not charge for the license -- rather, they could just source the SOC/POP -- currently the A4 CPU.

As these are currently manufactured by Sammy -- I suspect they wouldn't mind including them in New SammyTVs.

If Apple can make AirPlay ubiquitous, then all the TV mfgrs. will include it in their New HDTVs.

It is not unusual for large companies to compete at some levels, while collaborate at other levels.

.

Thanks for giving it a read. :-) In part, what Apple would be doing here is akin to what Android has done in smartphone. Target a vendor with a hardware centric view of the universe, who is only too happy to outsource the software layer to a third party. I think the difference is that if Apple does it, they are going to want a consistent user experience.

As others have noted, Apple has a religious aversion to OEM'ing its technology. They sell whole, living, breathing chickens -- not random chicken parts. Hence, I think this one makes sense to the extent it really is a delivery vehicle for iTunes and a proxy connector between iOS devices and TVs.

I just can't get my head around a scenario where Apple is selling a product with a 5-10 year lifecycle that takes up massive floor space. Where's the efficiency in that? At the same time, you know in Jobs lifecycle model, living room is the 4.0 (iPod = 1.0; iPhone/iPod touch = 2.0; iPad = 3.0) so something ubiquitous has to play there.
post #77 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Apple could have licensed FairPlay years ago to vendors of all sorts of devices and get paid from each and every one of those devices that were sold. They also could have licensed their OS to other PC vendors. They don’t do it because it hurts their HW sales and weakens their brand.

I think this would be have the same taste in their mouth. The AppleTV is no longer a product, but a feature of some 3rd-party’s product. I don’t think Apple wants that.. but they do want to make money, hence licensing AirPlay to strengthen their iDevice hold and use a way to push even more people into the AppleTVs which will be even more useful once and SDK and App Store appears.

This last one might never happen, but I have to think the amount of NAND that equals the Restore Stick on a MBA for holding iOS is a bit excessive just to keep it as is. I can also see the AppleTV being updated yearly or every two years with newer HW that will take advantage of the newer HW.

iPods and computers, however, are entirely self-contained experiences. Apple doesn't license the software for those because they want to control the experience.

AppleTV is a different beast, in that it must rely on a third party TV to function. It's already an accessory to someone else's hardware, and therefore unlike anything else Apple makes. Putting the aTV into the set doesn't really change anything, it just makes widespread uptake that much more likely.

And there's no reason for a licensed aTV function to dilute the Apple brand-- once you're in aTV, you're in Apple's hands. It's like an Apple channel on your set. For the user there would be absolutely no difference from switching to the appropriate HDMI input as they do now and switching to a dedicated AppleTV menu item. Apple could of course set hardware requirements as part of the licensing deal to make sure they didn't get crappy versions out there.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #78 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

iPods and computers, however, are entirely self-contained experiences. Apple doesn't license the software for those because they want to control the experience.

AppleTV is a different beast, in that it must rely on a third party TV to function. It's already an accessory to someone else's hardware, and therefore unlike anything else Apple makes. Putting the aTV into the set doesn't really change anything, it just makes widespread uptake that much more likely.

And there's no reason for a licensed aTV function to dilute the Apple brand-- once you're in aTV, you're in Apple's hands. It's like an Apple channel on your set. For the user there would be absolutely no difference from switching to the appropriate HDMI input as they do now and switching to a dedicated AppleTV menu item. Apple could of course set hardware requirements as part of the licensing deal to make sure they didn't get crappy versions out there.

I understand your position and you make a great case, as usual, I just cant shake the idea of Apple giving up that much of the AppleTV experience to license to 3rd-parties. To quote hypermark, Apple has a religious aversion to OEM'ing its technology. They sell whole, living, breathing chickens -- not random chicken parts.

The only unknown here (and possibly still unknown to Apple) is how to finally capture the HEC. So far no one has done it except for the cable and sat companies but Jobs convinced me that making their own cable/sat box wasnt an option do to inconsistencies with network designs. The network shunning GoogleTV seems to make it even harder for Apple to get in bed with cable/sat setup box makers (though I dont think anyone even mentioned that as an option).
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 #79 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) Talking about yourself in the 3rd person is odd.

There are no rules.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #80 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I understand your position and you make a great case, as usual, I just cant shake the idea of Apple giving up that much of the AppleTV experience to license to 3rd-parties. To quote hypermark, Apple has a religious aversion to OEM'ing its technology. They sell whole, living, breathing chickens -- not random chicken parts.

The only unknown here (and possibly still unknown to Apple) is how to finally capture the HEC. So far no one has done it except for the cable and sat companies but Jobs convinced me that making their own cable/sat box wasnt an option do to inconsistencies with network designs. The network shunning GoogleTV seems to make it even harder for Apple to get in bed with cable/sat setup box makers (though I dont think anyone even mentioned that as an option).

Yeah, I'm just kind of taking a position and running with it, but I can't disagree that such a move would run counter to Apple's history.

I guess I just personally feel that Apple could do itself a lot of good by allowing aTV to start showing up in new OEM sets. It would go a long way as legitimatizing them as "the" media hub, much as Netflix clients have made Netflix the de facto streaming movie service.

I mean, just imagine if most new sets came with aTV built in. And you realized that if you had an iPad or iPhone or iPod Touch, sharing content suddenly becomes vastly easier. And your iTunes library is suddenly liberated. And if you're not using iTunes, you really have to consider it. It would just be such a huge win.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple may license AirPlay video streaming to third-party HDTV makers