I'm not sure that I see Apple getting into the TV business either, but every time I use my f*&^%O&*ing Philips, I wish they did. Slow to turn on, terrible OSD, slow channel changing, etc. What an annoying POS. It's certainly something Apple would never have allowed out the door. Which is a great example of why Apple is Apple and the other companies just don't get it.
Recent Reviews
-
I was given the Ipod nano 6th generation for Christmas 2011. I was starting to take up running and needed something to track my run. since I just started I was only using my Ipod roughly 3 times...
-
I have had the iPad Verizon 4G LTE for a month now, and over all I couldn't be happier with the machine. The only issue I have found so far is when on wifi it has a slower speed in processing...
-
I have owned at least a dozen different Mac laptops over the years, starting with a Powerbook 1400 back in the day. The 13-inch Air is my absolute favorite of the bunch. It's the first laptop...
-
I spent quite a bit of time reading the setup manuals and various Apple articles about manually setting up this device since I have an unusual setup, and the setup manuals indicated I would have...
-
all i have to say is i love it its so much faster and i could just slip it into my purse p.s it has a ton of space for the 64gb
Steve Jobs told biographer he 'cracked' the secret to a simple HDTV - Page 2

Introducing yet another device that is, again, a remote? That doesn't sound right for two reasons: (1) that's clunky, and (2) Steve mentioned the simplest interface imaginable. Well, the answer to number two is more likely voice control, rather than more touch interfaces or devices.
Thompson
Siri for TV would / could be useful except you'd be fighting for Siri's ear(s) with the damn TV. But Siri in you iPad / iPhone could integrate nicely using airplay.
Mind you, its hard to beat the simplicity of the Apple remote.
"Siri, is there any Baseball on?"
Siri replies with a display of options and times on the iPad / iPhone.
"Any particular game you want"... etc

It's odd though, because given Apple's (Steve's) legendary secretiveness you'd almost have to think that speaking on record about such a thing was a sign they had decided not to go forward.
That, or Steve's illness and sense of looming mortality made him more inclined to talk candidly about projects he knew he would never get to introduce himself.
Odd enough. Perhaps this is Jobs' way of sustaining the aura around Apple, of ensuring that everyone continues to believe truly novel breakthrough products (and not just future generations of iPhones and iPads) are indeed in the pipeline.
Not that much space. It would just be for three TV's. Considering how many iPods and iPads they have, I'm sure they could ditch a few for just three big screen tv's.
- Joined: Nov 2001
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Posts: 11,537
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User
I know..I'm all set to buy a new HDTV next year but i'm thinking.
A. Should I wait?
B. Can I even afford Apple as my HDTV set?
- SolipsismX
- SolipsismX
- Tallest Skil
- Cartography!
- Joined: Aug 2010
- Location: 1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
- Posts: 24,397
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User
No, we heard it HERE first.
And no, we didn't hear it. Because that's about the stupidest month imaginable for any product release, much less a nonexistent HDTV.
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.

I'm not sure that I see Apple getting into the TV business either, but every time I use my f*&^%O&*ing Philips, I wish they did. Slow to turn on, terrible OSD, slow channel changing, etc. What an annoying POS. It's certainly something Apple would never have allowed out the door. Which is a great example of why Apple is Apple and the other companies just don't get it.
There are so many issues with the current HEC system that I am sure JOb's idea of "cracked" isn't simply adding TVs with a built-in AppleTV UI. That's the first thing one considers before facturing costs, profits and logistics. For Jobs to say "cracked" the answer isnt doing what others have been doing for years unsuccessfully.
??? One 50" TV takes up the shelf space of dozens of highly profitable iPhones and iPads. I can't see Apple sacrificing their store room space for these.
Why 3? we limit notebooks and handheld devices because of our limitations, but a wall is much more giving. What if I want a 12" in the kitchen and bathroom, 20" in the guest bedroom and den, 40" in the bedrooms and 60" in the living rooms. TV dispatch ranges vary a lot more than with other electronics for a reason. Even PCs have a seemingly infinite number of display sizes that nan be attached. This is part of the nut Apple would have to crack.
TV Subscription.
DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.
DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.
A television is like a digital photo frame. A stupid device intended to just show a picture. Nothing more. Every keeps trying to "reinvent" this device by keep adding all kinds of crap to it.
Besides, can you imagine people bringing a huge Apple television to the Genius bar... It would be comical sight.
Apple can help re-think that. What do you want your TV for? To watch your TV shows and music, right? If Apple can make a dead simple TV that can do that with a simple interface that ties in nicely with your iOS devices and computers, they would get a ton of interest.
In your living room is a TV that plugs into the power outlet. That's it. O.K, maybe an ethernet jack, but not a million interface ports on it. Want games? Your iPod is the controller. Want videos? They are on your computer or downloaded over the internet.
Apple does a great job of scrapping old, dead technology. This is the natural next step.
- Joined: Aug 2011
- Location: The most southern land under the Star Spangled Banner
- Posts: 176
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User
FL is right, Apple won't do a TV unless it can change the game - and the all rules - so they can dominate the new market they would create, just like the way the iPad does today.
The game changer is to eliminate the complex remote. Replace it with Siri.
Think a full blown OSX Mac - built into a cable ready wide-screen - driven by Siri. (Mouse & keyboard are optional)
Siri is the key, it's the interface of the future and Siri is what will drive development of revolutionary Apple devices.
Siri is the next killer app, I mean, imagine how well Siri well perform 3 years from now.
Wow!

- Joined: Nov 2001
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Posts: 11,537
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User

I for one don't think an Apple branded TV would be a good move for Apple. Its a market where the race to the bottom is key... Apple would not be able to compete on price.
A television is like a digital photo frame. A stupid device intended to just show a picture. Nothing more. Every keeps trying to "reinvent" this device by keep adding all kinds of crap to it.
Besides, can you imagine people bringing a huge Apple television to the Genius bar... It would be comical sight.
I think the TV market parallels other markets almost exactly.
You want a low cost TV you buy a Westinghouse or low end Visio. You want cream of the crop you by a Samsung or a Sharp. Entering the market doesn't make Apple nor anyone else beholden to approaching the low end with product.
A questions to ask yourself "why is Apple integrating Bluetooth 4.0 into new products?"
- SolipsismX
- SolipsismX

It's odd though, because given Apple's (Steve's) legendary secretiveness you'd almost have to think that speaking on record about such a thing was a sign they had decided not to go forward.
That, or Steve's illness and sense of looming mortality made him more inclined to talk candidly about projects he knew he would never get to introduce himself.
That, or Issacson missed the part where Steve said, "Off the record,..."
That would be weird timing. Holiday shopping gets big in November. But football is a big driver of TV sales, so I guess any time before mid January is at least sort of reasonable.
If they are launcing a TV, Nov/Dec timing would make the iPhone adjustment to October seem wrong. Apple likes to stagger products around the calendar. You'd think they would either have kept the phones in June or done the TV then. Doing both in Q1 just doesn't seem right.

I think the TV market parallels other markets almost exactly.
You want a low cost TV you buy a Westinghouse or low end Visio. You want cream of the crop you by a Samsung or a Sharp. Entering the market doesn't make Apple nor anyone else beholden to approaching the low end with product.
A questions to ask yourself "why is Apple integrating Bluetooth 4.0 into new products?"
Why are the integrating Bluetooth 4.0. Don't know. I hope it isn't for a TV though.
The high end television market is loaded with top end sets that offer tons of expandability, big screens, and big price drops... Apple won't be able to compete in this space... They just won't.

I for one don't think an Apple branded TV would be a good move for Apple. Its a market where the race to the bottom is key... Apple would not be able to compete on price.
A television is like a digital photo frame. A stupid device intended to just show a picture. Nothing more. Every keeps trying to "reinvent" this device by keep adding all kinds of crap to it.
Besides, can you imagine people bringing a huge Apple television to the Genius bar... It would be comical sight.

Why are the integrating Bluetooth 4.0. Don't know. I hope it isn't for a TV though.
The high end television market is loaded with top end sets that offer tons of expandability, big screens, and big price drops... Apple won't be able to compete in this space... They just won't.
People said the exact same thing before and after Apple announced the iPhone. Phones were getting cheaper and cheaper and more and more gimmicky and it was a race to the bottom. Smartphones were a growth area, but everyone knew it was dominated by a few key players who couldn't be displaced and whose business models were sacrosanct. Even today, look at the Android vendors in the smartphone market competing, seemingly, for who can make the least amount of money from selling the highest number of units. Decidedly a race to the bottom there, and one which Apple is able to ably avoid.
I imagine genius appointments and analysis of any such TVs would be done remotely, much as they are (or are intending) to do with iPhones/iPads. If and when the problem is determined to be a hardware problem and not a software issue, then they can arrange for pickup or something.
"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.
"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.
- Joined: Aug 2011
- Location: The most southern land under the Star Spangled Banner
- Posts: 176
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User

FL is right, Apple won't do a TV unless it can change the game - and the all rules - so they can dominate the new market they would create, just like the way the iPad does today.
The game changer is to eliminate the complex remote. Replace it with Siri.
Think a full blown OSX Mac - built into a cable ready wide-screen - driven by Siri. (Mouse & keyboard are optional)
Siri is the key, it's the interface of the future and Siri is what will drive development of revolutionary Apple devices.
Siri is the next killer app, I mean, imagine how well Siri well perform 3 years from now.
Wow!

One more thing, Your Siri "Apple TV" is also a server, and with Siri enabled flat-panels in every room, you could access all your data, no matter where you are in your house - simply by speaking.
Wow!


People said the exact same thing before and after Apple announced the iPhone. Phones were getting cheaper and cheaper and more and more gimmicky and it was a race to the bottom. Smartphones were a growth area, but everyone knew it was dominated by a few key players who couldn't be displaced and whose business models were sacrosanct. Even today, look at the Android vendors in the smartphone market competing, seemingly, for who can make the least amount of money from selling the highest number of units. Decidedly a race to the bottom there, and one which Apple is able to ably avoid.
I imagine genius appointments and analysis of any such TVs would be done remotely, much as they are (or are intending) to do with iPhones/iPads. If and when the problem is determined to be a hardware problem and not a software issue, then they can arrange for pickup or something.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. The cable companies and the content creators control the interface. Not Apple. Huge difference.
Think about it... Right now your cable box controls the TV interface. I set my TV to channel 3 and my cable box takes care of the inteface. How will Apple change this?
My PS3/XBOX 360 is connected to my TV via HDMI and component cabling. When I turn them on, its their interface I see. How will Apple change this?
Now if Apple announces a partnership with say Time Warner or Verizon whereas they change the playing field, then you got a whole new ball game. But just for a TV. No way.
- Joined: Nov 2001
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Posts: 11,537
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The cable companies and the content creators control the interface. Not Apple. Huge difference.
Think about it... Right now your cable box controls the TV interface. I set my TV to channel 3 and my cable box takes care of the inteface. How will Apple change this?
My PS3/XBOX 360 is connected to my TV via HDMI and component cabling. When I turn them on, its their interface I see. How will Apple change this?
Now if Apple announces a partnership with say Time Warner or Verizon whereas they change the playing field, then you got a whole new ball game. But just for a TV. No way.
No he's right.
Before the iPhone ,and even today with many carriers, the control over software updates came from the carrier not the phone provider. The carriers often used newer upgrades of software to push users to new phones/contacts. Apple was one of the first to get the ability to manage their own hardware on a cell providers network. This is analogous to the Cable Op control over content with one primary distinction. Streaming. Apple can bypass Cable Op simply by jacking into iTunes. A HDTV merely becomes a giant tablet running iOS.
Cable Boxes don't control the TV...they simply add the DRM necessary for premium channels. If you have basic cable a simple coax going into an integrated ATSC tuner can turn channels. People have become accustomed to thinking they need a box under their TV to function. Many have forgotten that even HD can be retrieved with an antenna sitting on roof top.
- SolipsismX
- SolipsismX
It would be funny as heck if the T+ siri start to respond to spoken commands from the TV show or commercials.
- Joined: Nov 2001
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Posts: 11,537
- offline
- Select All Posts By This User
More likely what would happen would be a remote app that comes with the TV that pairs a particular iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad to the TV and only that device would enable the TV to work and of course Siri would have to eventually move across to all platforms for the voice control to be native.
- SolipsismX
- SolipsismX
Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.
Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

It's odd though, because given Apple's (Steve's) legendary secretiveness you'd almost have to think that speaking on record about such a thing was a sign they had decided not to go forward.
That, or Steve's illness and sense of looming mortality made him more inclined to talk candidly about projects he knew he would never get to introduce himself.
I think it may have more to do with the change in the book's release schedule. Remember, they moved it way up from the original planned release date.
haha... maybe all of the next few product releases will come from him, prerecorded and leaked at the appropriate time... he's the man...
BMW has already expressed an interest in getting Siri into their vehicles.
I would love that.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.
Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The cable companies and the content creators control the interface. Not Apple. Huge difference.
Think about it... Right now your cable box controls the TV interface. I set my TV to channel 3 and my cable box takes care of the inteface. How will Apple change this?
My PS3/XBOX 360 is connected to my TV via HDMI and component cabling. When I turn them on, its their interface I see. How will Apple change this?
Now if Apple announces a partnership with say Time Warner or Verizon whereas they change the playing field, then you got a whole new ball game. But just for a TV. No way.
The cable co's and satellite companies do control the interface now. For now. The wireless companies controlled the user experience to a large degree, pre-iPhones, as well. From how you could ingest multimedia, to how you received updates to how you received apps, it was all carrier controlled. Apple changed that.
As for the cable interface, well, it wouldn't be un-Apple like to control the interface and gain provider partnerships in doing so, just as the gained carrier partnerships to disrupt how we deal with our phones. There is no reason a TV couldn't be smart enough to adapt it's interface to the inputs involved. If it is cable from Comcast or satellite from DirectTV, make a determination as to what UI's and what tuners and what codec and decoders are needed. Granted this would all depend on partnerships with the cableco's, but Apple has done this before. They negotiated with and received concessions and agreements with carriers and record companies and movie studios and TV content producers. It isn't a given that they couldn't do this again.
"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.
"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

The cable co's and satellite companies do control the interface now. For now. The wireless companies controlled the user experience to a large degree, pre-iPhones, as well. From how you could ingest multimedia, to how you received updates to how you received apps, it was all carrier controlled. Apple changed that.
As for the cable interface, well, it wouldn't be un-Apple like to control the interface and gain provider partnerships in doing so, just as the gained carrier partnerships to disrupt how we deal with our phones. There is no reason a TV couldn't be smart enough to adapt it's interface to the inputs involved. If it is cable from Comcast or satellite from DirectTV, make a determination as to what UI's and what tuners and what codec and decoders are needed. Granted this would all depend on partnerships with the cableco's, but Apple has done this before. They negotiated with and received concessions and agreements with carriers and record companies and movie studios and TV content producers. It isn't a given that they couldn't do this again.
I agree. It won't be long before people demand programming a la carte, and Apple will be there to spoon up the big sticky blobs of rancid television for our pulsating brains.


Wrong, wrong, wrong. The cable companies and the content creators control the interface. Not Apple. Huge difference.
Think about it... Right now your cable box controls the TV interface. I set my TV to channel 3 and my cable box takes care of the inteface. How will Apple change this?
My PS3/XBOX 360 is connected to my TV via HDMI and component cabling. When I turn them on, its their interface I see. How will Apple change this?
Now if Apple announces a partnership with say Time Warner or Verizon whereas they change the playing field, then you got a whole new ball game. But just for a TV. No way.
Changing it is simple. Reverse the equation. Your Cable box plugs into Apple TV, so does your XBox, you see APPLE's Siri-driven interface and it issues commands to your devices like a Harmony remote. Apple will turn the cable box into a dumb Hard-Drive and Content Pipe and control the interface and experience in the last mile - on the display. They can then slowly push the cable companies out with easier content availability via iTunes.

Changing it is simple. Reverse the equation. Your Cable box plugs into Apple TV, so does your XBox, you see APPLE's Siri-driven interface and it issues commands to your devices like a Harmony remote. Apple will turn the cable box into a dumb Hard-Drive and Content Pipe and control the interface and experience in the last mile - on the display. They can then slowly push the cable companies out with easier content availability via iTunes.
Perhaps Apple will soon announce the acquisition of i.TV, a very good app that has TV schedule listings and other interesting features.

Changing it is simple. Reverse the equation. Your Cable box plugs into Apple TV, so does your XBox, you see APPLE's Siri-driven interface and it issues commands to your devices like a Harmony remote. Apple will turn the cable box into a dumb Hard-Drive and Content Pipe and control the interface and experience in the last mile - on the display. They can then slowly push the cable companies out with easier content availability via iTunes.
Intriguing idea, but HDCP will get in the way of making it work. They may be able to get around the licensing problems if they built the AppleTV into the television though... That might explain why they would build the HDTV even though they typically stay out of markets that already have products that are good enough.
I'm ready to buy a new TV. Hopefully iCloud or iOS 5 was the missing piece and they are ready to move forward.
- Steve Jobs told biographer he 'cracked' the secret to a simple HDTV
Recent Discussions
- › Editorial: Apple's billions are building an empire for the future 6 minutes ago
- › Cook: US-built Mac will be refreshed version of existing product 8 minutes ago
- › Apple yanks 'Bang with Friends' app from iOS App Store 10 minutes ago
- › ISLAM WATCH 48 minutes ago
- › The future of the MacBook Pro 49 minutes ago
- › Review: AL13 raises the bar for iPhone bumper design 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
- › 10M Samsung flagship phones in 28 days a 'record,' 5M iPhone 5 in 3... 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
- › US Air Force expects to save $50M with use of 18K Apple iPads 2 hours, 2 minutes ago
- › Intel, Nvidia show off next-gen silicon potentially bound for... 2 hours, 32 minutes ago
- › The very real damage done by anti-gay BIGOTS--why marriage equality... 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
Recent Reviews
- › Apple iPod nano - 16GB, Silver MC526LL/A (6th Generation) by cc420
- › Apple iPad with Retina Display Wi-Fi + Verizon/Sprint 4G - 64GB,... by Aaron Krahn
- › 13.3-inch Apple MacBook Air MD231LL/A (Mid-2012) by ahilal
- › Apple Time Capsule - 2TB (MD032LL/A) by biyahero
- › Apple iPad Wi-Fi - 64GB, White (MD330LL/A) by raeganapril
- › Apple Magic Trackpad (MC380LL/A) by WisdomSeed
- › Aperture 3 by bcbcbroderick
- › 17-inch Apple MacBook Pro MD311LL/A (Late 2011) by bcbcbroderick
- › Apple iPod touch - 32GB, Black MC544LL/A (4th Generation) by bcbcbroderick
- › Apple iPod touch - 8 GB, White MD057LL/A (4th Generation) by bcbcbroderick
New Apple Wikis
- › 2013 'Modified' iPod touch by Mikeycampbell81
- › 2013 MacBook Pros by Mikeycampbell81
- › iPad mini 2 with Retina display by Mikeycampbell81
- › 2013 iPhone 5S by Mikeycampbell81
- › Trade in your old devices for holiday cash by Mikeycampbell81
- › How to sell your old iPad for cash by Mikeycampbell81
- › How to offset the cost of a new iPhone by... by Mikeycampbell81
- › How to save money on AppleCare extended... by Kasper
- › How to offset the cost of a new iPad mini by... by Mikeycampbell81
- › Apple Prototypes by Mikeycampbell81
About AppleInsider | Join the Community | Advertise
© 2013 AppleInsider is powered by Huddler Tech | FAQ | Support | Privacy/TOS | Site Map







