or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple rumored to be working on iOS-powered HDTVs for late 2011
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple rumored to be working on iOS-powered HDTVs for late 2011

post #1 of 130
Thread Starter 
A new rumor claims Apple is readying an iOS-powered connected TV, possibly for release as early as this fall.

A former Apple executive, speaking anonymously, said the company plans to "blow Netflix and all those other guys away" by bundling Apple TV + iTunes inside a physical display, DailyTech reports. Apple is reportedly teaming up with a major supplier to provide the rebranded television sets, the source noted.

When questioned why an OEM would cut into its sales by providing Apple with units, the source said, "If you have to be competing with somebody, you want to be competing with yourself."

The tipster indicated a planned fall launch, while noting that the product could get pushed to next year because of Apple's "high standards." A fall launch could coincide with the launch of the next-generation iPhone, as well as iOS 5 and iCloud.

"You'll go into an Apple retail store and be able to walk out with a TV. It's perfect," the source said. According to the unverified report, the iOS-driven televisions would support third-party apps.

Rumors of an Apple Smart TV have existed for years, with Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster repeatedly forecasting the product. Munster has suggested that an Internet-connected TV from Apple may have a starting price in the range of $2,000.



In March, Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty said Asian suppliers had told her Apple had built a Smart TV prototype. According to Huberty, an Apple-branded TV could add as much as $4 billion per 1 percent share of the TV market Apple is able to capture over the next two years.

Then, in April, Brian White with Ticonderoga Securities said "data points" from a China electronics trade show suggested Apple could launch an HDTV set possibly by the end of the year. "Our research suggests this Smart TV would go well beyond the miniature $99 second-generation Apple TV that the company released last fall and provide a full-blown TV product for consumers," White said.

Though Apple CEO Steve Jobs said last year that the Apple TV set top box product is "a hobby" for the company, sales of the $99 second-generation model have improved over the first-generation. After the company sold 250,000 units in the first six weeks of availability, Jobs said Apple was "thrilled" with the figures.

Apple went on to sell 1 million Apple TVs within three months of the device's launch. However, analysts have estimated that a million units per quarter would amount to a "fairly immaterial" $400 million in annual revenue.

Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of Concord Securities said in April that Apple TV sales had reached 2 million, reportedly selling 820,000 units in the March quarter.
post #2 of 130
Nope.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope.

Yeah this sounds too made up. A former Apple exec? What executive, senior enough to know about their plans, has left recently? And wouldn't s/he be under a strict NDA anyway? The NDA doesn't disappear once you leave the company. Also, the "inside" info seems a bit generic. Anybody with a cursory knowledge of Apple and their rumored TV plans could come up with those quotes.

Edit: upon re-reading this article, I am further convinced that it is complete bull$hit. No way.
post #4 of 130
It's probably bogus but I do hope it's true. I've been very very disappointed with my 40inch Samsung TV. 1080p? hah more like 1040.
post #5 of 130
This would be huge! Apple will take over the living room. Just the slide show showing photos is worth the price of admission! But if Apple could one-up NetFlix that would icing on the cake.

My ATV replaced my stereo in my loving room so I was able to get rid of the components and all the attendant wires, pwr plugs, ugly pwr bricks, etc.

My only complaint now is the horrible, clunky Cable and TV interfaces!
post #6 of 130
You don't beat Netflix with hardware
post #7 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

You don't beat Netflix with hardware

They're not trying to beat Netflix at all...

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #8 of 130
On TV, live sporting events are all that matter. Unless Apple can find a way to overcome the contractual obligations of sports teams to the networks than this idea is a non-starter.
post #9 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

They're not trying to beat Netflix at all...

I know, but that's what the alleged ex Apple executive suggested.
post #10 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

On TV, live sporting events are all that matter. Unless Apple can find a way to overcome the contractual obligations of sports teams to the networks than this idea is a non-starter.

Correct, which is why Steve refers to Apple TV as a "hobby."

NFL, NBA, MLB, PGA, Nascar, various NCAA football conferences, etc. control the U.S. TV advertising dollars, not "Real Housewives of ____" or "Gossip Girl." Heck, the president of the SEC probably wields more clout with his conference football schedule than any New York or Los Angeles television producer.

It's a far cry between selling songs, books, or even downloadable/streaming movies than it is selling live sports.

That's why all of these athletic leagues are attempting to expand their postseason schedule by lengthening series, adding more teams, increasing the number of rounds, etc.

If you don't pay attention to live sports, you're basically not getting a first-hand view of the real money behind television.
post #11 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

On TV, live sporting events are all that matter. Unless Apple can find a way to overcome the contractual obligations of sports teams to the networks than this idea is a non-starter.

You mean like with MLB.tv and NBA League Pass?

Oh wait, those are already available with Apple TV 2.

Seriously, content is not going to be a problem when Apple opens up Apple TV to iOS third party apps, and every content provider on earth is coming out with their own $X.99 application (or subscription based application) to give every TV-phile what they've always wanted -- ala carte programming. Buy the apps of the content providers you want to watch.
post #12 of 130
BS

Apple moves their own hardware, keeps things simple, provides updates.

Limits sales to people who are in the market for a new TV.

In it's current form, that little black box known as Apple TV hooks up to any TV for a low cost.
post #13 of 130
Of all the hardware i would love to buy from Apple, an HDTV is not even on the list.
post #14 of 130
I don't believe a word of it.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #15 of 130
What screen sizes would make it worth while for Apple to build a TV? The cheapest thing Apple sells is a single music download. I've read that the sole purpose of iTunes was to sell hardware. The iPod Shuffle is really inexpensive compared to computers. How much money does Apple earn with those?

If Apple earns a profit with Apple TV boxes now, how much more would they earn if they re-badged a commercial TV set with built in Apple TV? There is a lot more labor and energy required to move around a giant TV set than an iPod Shuffle. TVs are a very competitive niche. Apple would need to keep the price low to grab any decent portion of the marketplace.

If I were the least bit interested in owning a huge TV with a dedicated streaming video service, I'd go with a Sony TV and buy an aftermarket movie box for $100.00. I like the Bravia models. I don't even know if they're still made. I just really like my 23" monitor for watching movies on my computer.
post #16 of 130
10 bucks Apple will have brilliant content partners such as the BBC (IPlayer content) - beautifully integrated.
post #17 of 130
Oh god no.
Terrible idea.
post #18 of 130
Oh, it's worth pointing out that this article is quoting Katy Huberty, who has an undeniably lousy track record in predicting Apple's movements.

If she says something is going to happen, the smart bet is that the opposite will end up being the case. Same with Gene Munster. AppleInsider missed the "crap analyst" hat trick by not quoting Shaw Wu. These three are not star-rated analysts.
post #19 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

You don't beat Netflix with hardware

Quite so. Wow, these Apple TV rumors go on forever, don't they?
post #20 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

On TV, live sporting events are all that matter. ...

What a twisted view of television, and how insulting to say it like that.

Ever occur to you that other people don't necessarily share your likes/dislikes? If you want to talk market share there are other categories of programming at least as popular. There are many that make more money for the cable operators also.
post #21 of 130
All you naysayers will be lining up around the Apple Store for iTV.
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 #22 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


If you don't pay attention to live sports, you're basically not getting a first-hand view of the real money behind television.

Then perhaps there's money to be made by appealing to people who don't want to be held hostage to the sports/cable cartel. People who aren't interested in drug juiced thyroid cases banging into each other.
post #23 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Then perhaps there's money to be made by appealing to people who don't want to be held hostage to the sports/cable cartel. People who aren't interested in drug juiced thyroid cases banging into each other.

Sorry, major sporting events command higher television ad rates than non-sports programming.

If the major networks/cable companies could have the Super Bowl, Masters golf, NCAA March Madness all twelve months of the year, they would gladly dump everything else.

That's how the NHL ended up on Versus with a pathetic television contract. They were no longer a good "product" and couldn't command the advertising. Remember, there was a time when spelling bees on ESPN were getting higher ratings than hockey games.

It's not just about putting some neckless juiced athlete on the field, it's about putting an athlete that people will watch.

There's plenty of room for non-sports programming. Heck, I will gladly admit that most of my non-sports programming are PBS shows: NOVA, Nature, P.O.V., Frontline, etc. I value this content, which is why I donate to my local PBS station.
post #24 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

You don't beat Netflix with hardware

If it offers the same or very similar rental features as Netflix why can't they maybe not beat them, but strongly compete?

Quote:
Originally Posted by halhiker View Post

On TV, live sporting events are all that matter. Unless Apple can find a way to overcome the contractual obligations of sports teams to the networks than this idea is a non-starter.

I agree, sports is the only thing keeping me tethered to cable tv. If someone could find a way to get live sports on apple tv or any similar device I'd dump comcast and get a *tv box.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl View Post

Apple moves their own hardware, keeps things simple.

They did try to do the Volkswagen iPod car a handful of years ago, but the deal fell through (reportedly). Apple doesn't make cars, but they tried to get VW to put iPod like device and more into cars. Why not a TV?

For the people saying "BS" and false will you return and admit to being wrong if this time next year Apple is offering HDTVs at their stores and in Best Buy? Some here love to make bold claims as if...
post #25 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Sorry, major sporting events command higher television ad rates than non-sports programming.

Absolutely no doubt whatsoever, they also command higher pay per view figures. But that doesn't mean that people aren't willing to pay for cable who don't watch sport. Those people might be willing to pay for a different television solution that didn't leave them paying for a bunch of channels that they never watch - which is how cable/satellite tends to end up in the UK.

It wouldn't be a huge seller, definitely more of a toe-in-the -water product. But then it wouldn't cost much to develop either, just a nice enclosure, a standard panel and a set-top box that they already have.
post #26 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

What a twisted view of television, and how insulting to say it like that.

Ever occur to you that other people don't necessarily share your likes/dislikes? If you want to talk market share there are other categories of programming at least as popular. There are many that make more money for the cable operators also.

I think you are missing his point - it's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of ad revenue. For pretty much all non-sports programming, folks are more and more opting for viewing options that allow them omit/skip through ads(DVDs, DVR, torrents, etc). But most sports fans like to watch their events in real time, so they are captive audiences to the ads, and are likely to stay that way. Thus the comment that the big $$$ is from sports.

And of course the whole Apple selling TVs is BS. Just what they want to do - get in to a high cost commodity business. It sounds like some clueless suit giving his idea of innovation. Why make a $2000 TV with low margins when you can make a $99 box you can hide behind the TV that delivers 100% of the content/interface? If anything I see Apple working with someone to make "Apple TV ready televisions" (like AirPrint or AirPlay peripherals).
post #27 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

My ATV replaced my stereo in my loving room so I was able to get rid of the components and all the attendant wires, pwr plugs, ugly pwr bricks, etc.

What else you got in your loving room?
post #28 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

For the people saying "BS" and false will you return and admit to being wrong if this time next year Apple is offering HDTVs at their stores and in Best Buy? Some here love to make bold claims as if...

The thing is that they probably won't need to.

My guess is that 95-98% of Apple rumors on all technology sites end up being false. If you read something about Apple that didn't originate from Apple.com, most likely it is not true and won't be.

I've made my share of inane predictions, but I've always recognized my odds of being correct. Heck, just accepting the fact that most predictions are wrong may actually make you a more saner judge of what's probable.
post #29 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

All you naysayers will be lining up around the Apple Store for iTV.

Name 1 compelling reason to replace an existing HDTV with an Apple-branded equivalent...


Yes, I already have an ATV2!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #30 of 130
If the price is right and works out of the box with my ipad and iphone for airplay, remote and such, I cannot see why I wouldn't choose it over other TV's.
post #31 of 130
Is it just me or was that graphic comparing the Apple TV to a standard TV package a little rediculous? $150 for a blu-ray player, 0% chance the Apple TV has any kind of similar feature. $300 for a DVR plus monthly fees (only if you're using TiVo). $130 for an Audio receiver, is the Apple TV going to have the functionality of a receiver (nope). $250 game console, can i play Modern Warfare on it (doubtful). $97/month for comcast? I hope the Apple TV allows me to watch anything I want at anytime for that price comparison.

It should be more like $1000 (for 120hz led not lcd), $70/month for comcast, $100 for an Apple TV equals $1170 compared to $2000.

I would be intrigued to see an actual Apple Television though. They don't half-ass anything they put out (I guess except for the original Apple TV) and would love to see what they come up with. Lets just hope its a little more well thought out than Google TV though if it does happen.
post #32 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

All you naysayers will be lining up around the Apple Store for iTV.

Well, I might be one of them …
I don't really believe this rumor will come to fruition but it could. Certainly Apple would like to be in the living room. Big market and potentially big bucks. It is also an area Apple knows is ripe for a makeover and one in which Apple could do 'revolutionary' things. The (alleged) tv would be part of a broad push. Large screens has value in terms of getting the Apple brand in to the right place - in front of eye balls.
So if ApPle can find a away for all the different content providers to come aboard and find technically find a way for this to be done - and convince the content providers to let Apple take care of the interface - much like Netflix content is presented through the atv interface, then maybe.
As far as screen sizes it is much less problematic - starting with 30, 40 & 50" models.

One other point - the day Apple starts selling TV sets in the apple store is the day Apple needs to set up a 'pro' division.
post #33 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorotea9999 View Post

Of all the hardware i would love to buy from Apple, an HDTV is not even on the list.

And you never imagined buying an Apple phone either.
post #34 of 130
Great idea. If Samsung was making the set, and it had an integrated iTunes, Apple TV, and perhaps a hard drive for internal storage, I'd be all over it. I like the current Apple TV's, but finding a place to mount it for free hanging televisions sucks. Apple wants to rule the household entertainment experience, and this is right on par with that goal.
post #35 of 130
The details are vague in this post ("a former Apple exec?") so there is little to comment on. But I would say that the value add that Apple would bring (if they did this) would be a simplification of the ever more complex and stupid tangle of wires that TV has become. A smart, powerful, centralized, and sensible Media center that works with the internet and the various usual computing devices and home network hardware, and does so seamlessly, would be a good thing. It should cost no more than a similar quality TV plus $250-$300 bucks or so (depending on features.) A thunderbolt plug that allows a variety of ad ons or even just the ability to use it as a monitor would be a nice.
Pay per view can be delivered via the internet as easily as cable. Perhaps the cable companies will get smart and offer their wares via the internet on a pay as you go basis. Paying for cable + internet + mobile + NetFlix + whatever every month is wearing thin for people. So much of it is redundant. There is room for disruption in this space. People want to pay less, to one entity, for a service that covers more of the bases. They'll be happy to pay extra for the things they want but don't want to be bothered with what they don't care about. Apple (perhaps partnering with Tivo, NetFlix, and some forward thinking content providers) could fill the bill nicely.
post #36 of 130
Sounds possible. Hopefully Apple does it right.
post #37 of 130
I was also thinking $2000 was a little too high, but Apple seems to be doing well with its significantly higher priced Mac lineup. When you see a Windows PC comparably equipped to a $2000 Macbook Pro you can usually find it for $1000-1200. They have proven people will pay for design + user experience. Too many other companies ignore this and race to the lowest price, which is why Apple continues to grow while others are struggling.
post #38 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Name 1 compelling reason to replace an existing HDTV with an Apple-branded equivalent...


Yes, I already have an ATV2!

Quality Apple quality hardware
Integrated experience decent UI,
Simplicity one remote, few cables, it just works
Disruption fewer billing entities, lower service prices, F&#* the cable company
post #39 of 130
Here are 12 reasons I see it happen:

1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
post #40 of 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by brclark82 View Post

I was also thinking $2000 was a little too high, but Apple seems to be doing well with its significantly higher priced Mac lineup. When you see a Windows PC comparably equipped to a $2000 Macbook Pro you can usually find it for $1000-1200. They have proven people will pay for design + user experience. Too many other companies ignore this and race to the lowest price, which is why Apple continues to grow while others are struggling.

This is a constant argument all over the internet, especially slashdot. But I come down on the side that gets stuck on that "comparable" thing. When the hardware is actually "comparable" Apple HW is competitive (particularly in laptops.) The Mac Pros and Mac Mini tend to be more expensive, but there really isn't a lot of similar hardware to compare it to. Just don't buy RAM from Apple.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple rumored to be working on iOS-powered HDTVs for late 2011