Analyst says Apple working on 'Smart TV' prototype in bid for living room - Page 4

I notice most of the new Blu-Ray players, even though they're not recorders, have an HDMI input, so you can run one cable from your cable box, through your Blu-Ray player, and into the same input on your TV. When the player's off, the signal just feeds through. (Just like the Bad Old Days—coax to VCR to TV.) I don't know why they couldn't have done something similar with DVD players—it would have saved a lot of aggravation.

Smart TV's are starting to appear and Apple will loose its "wow" effect if they dont move this year has others will have "done it" before...

Being first to a market is not something Apple typically does. Even with USB, which is something they get attributed with as being first because they went all in, even though they were beaten to market by Dell and other vendors.

The iPod wasn’t even close to being the first digital HDD-based PMP. The iPad was about 2 decades too late for being the fist tablet. The iPhone was said to be doomed from the start because it was entering an entrenched mature market.

I think it’s more important that companies wait for the right time to enter a market. In a marathon the one who sprints offs the starting line is unlikely to maintain their lead.

Quite right solipsism - god Apple should have never had a chance in the cell phone market and they wouldn't have IF the Nokia and Moto's et al had actually delivered to market what was possible. The fact that they didn't couldn't wouldn't did not deter Apple from rethinking and delivering a quite extraordinary device.
I really think the same is possible in the living room. I use a mac mini as a htpc and love the fact that gone are all the stb's the frigg'n remotes that you can never find or a kid left in the bloody toilet ... lol drove me insane.
Of all the potential players I think they've got the best shot at it and surprise the market again with the same kind of innovation they bought to the cell phone segment.
We'll see soon I suspect.

edit: Come back, rolo - all is forgiven !
lol

You are quite right. I own an LG semi-smart TV. It is setup in my bedroom. I setup my Yahoo! account on it. It has widgets for other online services as well. Setup of the smart features is a bear. One thing that is generally not understood about digital TV sets is that they are really limited-feature computers with large monitors. For many, the OS behind the screen is Linux. If you have an HDTV, then pull-out your documentation and read it--especially the stuff in small print. You might be surprised.

As a technical exercise, there is no question that Apple can do better than current offerings. Broadcast is easy. At most, there are two broadcast standards per country. BTW, another of the trends that most people seem unaware of is that digital multicasting in the USA is helping broadcast to make gains against cable--especially in large metropolitan areas. But, the majority of viewers still get their TV via cable. Cable is a huge problem.

As I posted above, virtually all original digital cable is scrambled. Cable is fragmented at several different levels--content providers, cable providers, local regulation, state regulation, subscriber base, subscriber equipment, etc. By comparison, Apple in the USA must deal with exactly two providers who each support fewer than a half-dozen communication standards. On the cable TV front, you will find more fragmentation in many US counties.

The only path to viable Apple HDTV is for Steve Jobs to bring together the content providers--producers, studio heads, and such like--and the major cable providers to agree to standardize on CableCard, or better yet, drop scrambling all together. After all, cable's customer base is being eaten away by the Internet among young viewers and by broadcast among older viewers. Perhaps they will see the way before the face the same issues facing record labels.

Without an agreement to reverse the fragmentation in the cable industry, I see no way to make an Apple HDTV a viable product.

The TV as we know it is going to evolve and change. I have no doubt that Apple is prepping a true Apple TV, and there are a ton of good reasons to do it. We haven't seen a good example of this yet, nobody has done it, which is why its so unclear to most of us exactly how this thing will take shape.

Aside from cars, this is really the last big area of computing for Apple to conquer. There is immense opportunity to grow their computer business here, and redefine the living room. Make no mistake, the integrated Apple TV will be a computer, just not the kind of computer you expected. Just like the ipod, iphone and ipad, which are all personal computers of a sort.

That's really all I have to say about this. If you doubt this, you don't know Apple, and you don't know their ability to define and redefine a market. Hasn't the last decade taught us anything?

Actually, it is. The remote itself can tell you a lot about the TV. You only have to look at Apple's current remote control to get a feel for the way Apple thinks about these things. The iPhone, iPod and iPad Remotes are nice to have, but the Remote that actually ships with the TV is the most important remote. And absolutely one of the crucial elements to the TV UX. The real thing stopping Apple doing an actual TV is the content subscription plans for TV Shows. All-you-can-eat and all that. They can't ink that deal, and without that the TV would never be the hit Apple would want for them to truly take this TV thing head-on.

It'll do more than a regular TV does today, but will be easier to use than a regular TV with amazingly-elegant software and hardware seamlessly integrated together in one package.

The holy grail for this TV is to be the first true modern-living-room solution WITH ONE REMOTE!

I can't even count the number of tech trends that Apple was said to be obliged to respond to lest they get left behind.

When MS was showing that "Origami" concept video for their UMPC there were people posting here that were sure that if Apple didn't "do something" they would find themselves irrelevant. That was back in '06, and as it turned out they did "do something"-- 4 years later and it worked out pretty well.

Remember "VIIV"? Intel's media PC reference platform? Apple wasn't bothering with that, and a lot of people thought that meant they were going to "lose the living room" as everything coalesced around the new hotness. And we see where that is.

Every CES there's a new consortium or initiative or acronym that gets a lot of coverage, 99% of them never amount to anything.

The current state of "smart" TVs is pretty much like the smart phone business before Apple showed up-- worse, actually. My internet capable Samsung flatscreen has one of the clunkiest, hardest to setup, temperamental UIs I've ever seen on a consumer electronics device. It barely seems designed at all, and instead appears to be a random accretion of functionality as compiled by someone in the mailroom. And its interaction with my Samsung Bluray player, which is supposed feature some kind of Samsung exclusive device interaction, is absolute shit.

If anything, the current state of smart TVs will just make whatever Apple ends up doing all the more impressive. Of course, once Apple shows how, every other manufacture will follow suit and we will all politely pretend that it was never this bad.

Totally agreed. Apple has loads of time to get this right. I just wish for my sake they would hurry up. I DESPERATELY want an Apple Television and a living room with ONE "ELEGANT" REMOTE.

If the "one-remote" problem was the only issue this TV solved for the average technophobe-consumer I'd be on-fire with delight. Obviously Apple would go further. For me though, it would nearly be enough.

I COULD BANG ON-AND-ON ABOUT THIS ONE-REMOTE THING UNTIL I AM BLUE IN THE FACE. IT'S A BIG DEAL TO ME, LOL.

Anyone who mentions a "universal-remote" will get an obligatory Internet Slap.

"I COULD BANG ON-AND-ON ABOUT THIS ONE-REMOTE THING UNTIL I AM BLUE IN THE FACE. IT'S A BIG DEAL TO ME, LOL."

TOO RIGHT !!! IT"S A BIG DEAL FOR EVERYONE !! (whether they know it or not)
<small deviation>I read iWoz a few years ago - da Woz has a fair bit expertise in that "not to be mentioned" area. Not that Stevo is likely to to do anything about it with him - but still.<small deviation>

Someone will make the really smart move and provide all the long tail content (with various price piont options) sold together with a smart antenna (via a CEA 909B interface or otherwise) and an integerated content selection UI. The main nets' content still attracts the bulk of the viewing, and direct off-air pickup avoids all the content issues.
The classic distribution channels are not really structured to enable good reception becasue the profit margins for the accessory divisions <who sell antennas> are much higher than for conventional TV sets (try to reduce someone's bonus and you get all sorts of reasons why not). The hints hereinbefore and the public research indicates the technolgy seems to now be available to make this so, even if the current seperate products fall short. Example research: http://www.nabfastroad.org/Reports/N...antennaRpt.pdf

If anyone can pull all this together, its Apple, as they have shown ability to break out of classic constraints. Going after part of the large monthly bills from cable/sat with a oto purchase and a smooth a la carte offering thereafter sure sems like a business oppourtunity worth a shot. Another break through bite?

::>})