or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple television with iOS, Siri & FaceTime seen as $100B opportunity
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple television with iOS, Siri & FaceTime seen as $100B opportunity

post #1 of 106
Thread Starter 
An anticipated Apple high-definition television set, complete with iOS features including Siri voice commands, FaceTime video chat and access to the App Store, would be a strong product in a massive $100 billion market, according to a new analysis.

Brian White with Ticonderoga Securities issued a note to investors on Monday in which he reiterated his belief that prototype television sets made by Apple are "already flowing through factories over in China in early stage pilot and prototype production." That aligns with a separate report from earlier Monday which also said Apple was assembling prototype HDTVs for a potential 2012 product launch.

White said although the current $99 Apple TV set-top box is a "great product," Apple's revenue opportunity with such a device is limited. He said the Apple TV was originally scheduled for a hardware refresh this year, but that update was delayed in a move potentially related to an Apple television set.

"We believe the TV experience is in need of greater simplicity and innovation, providing Apple with opportunity to yet reinvent another product category and develop even closer ties with its customers," White wrote.

He cited research from DisplaySearch, which has estimated that the LCD TV market will generate $102 billion in 2012. He believes Apple could make a splash in that market but maintain its margins by charging a "healthy premium" when compared to competitors.

He sees Apple's so-called "smart TV" carrying a price as high as two to three times greater than competing LCD TVs. But he thinks Apple will be able to justify that price, and find success with consumers, with the company's brand, its "unmatched aesthetics, expansive digital ecosystem and overall quality."

"We believe a product could hit the market in the coming quarters, opening up a new growth category for Apple and driving sales of existing products that play into the Apple digital ecosystem," he said.



In addition to offering Siri and FaceTime on its television set, he believes Apple could also bring its iAd advertising platform as well, allowing developers of third-party applications on the App Store to earn more revenue with software and games written for the HDTV.

Apple's Game Center social network would also be a natural fit for an Apple-built HDTV, White believes. He sees a TV-focused App Store representing an even greater push for Apple into the gaming market.

Speculation regarding an Apple television set has picked up considerable steam since late last week it was revealed that Apple co-founder Steve Jobs revealed to his biographer before he died that he had worked on creating a simple and easy-to-use HDTV. He told author Walter Isaacson that he had "cracked" the concept for such a device.
post #2 of 106
Whether or not this is true is largely irrelevant at this point. The idiot analysts are already setting up absurd expectations ($100 B in revenues? Give me a break) that it will be impossible for Apple to meet. Now, if Apple only sells $50 B of HDTVs - or doesn't sell them at all but 'only' triples profit in their existing businesses, all the analysts and media can label Apple a failure again.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #3 of 106
If you have to accept the Apple ecosystem and buy content from them, this will be a non-starter. We are not veals in cages.
post #4 of 106
I'm fully entrenched in the Apple Ecosystem and I don't think I'd buy one. I have a 48" Sony that is only 3 years old. I've only bought two tv's in the last 12 years. Hooking a $99 appletv up to my tv works for me personally. I wonder how many folks are clamoring for this? Maybe they don't know they want it yet?
post #5 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

... analysts are already setting up absurd expectations ($100 B in revenues? Give me a break) ...

That number, $100 billion, was the total yearly HDTV market...no one was suggesting that Apple would take over the entire market...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #6 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I'm fully entrenched in the Apple Ecosystem and I don't think I'd buy one. I have a 48" Sony that is only 3 years old. I've only bought two tv's in the last 12 years. Hooking a $99 appletv up to my tv works for me personally. I wonder how many folks are clamoring for this? Maybe they don't know they want it yet?

People said the same thing about the iPhone and iPod.

Furthermore, people said that they wouldn't buy an iPhone 4S but would wait for an iPhone 5. We can see how that's working out.


The lesson here is that one shouldn't be talking about whether they'll buy a product or not when there's no real evidence that the product even exists, nor is there any evidence at all of features, pricing, etc.

It is absurd to even speculate on whether you'd buy a nonexistent product that nothing is known about.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #7 of 106
The current apple TV is really nice. I don't think many would pay 3x standard TV cost for Apple's turn-key approach. Its not clear to me why expanding the current apple TV and having it plug into a 'dumb' screen isn't a better way to go. The value of putting Apple TV into the display is pretty small, inflexible and expensive.
post #8 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdws View Post

If you have to accept the Apple ecosystem and buy content from them, this will be a non-starter. We are not veals in cages.

This just might be where you are wrong... willing ones at that...
post #9 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

That number, $100 billion, was the total yearly HDTV market...no one was suggesting that Apple would take over the entire market...

Other than AI which says that it's a $100 B opportunity for Apple.

That aside, the number is irrelevant - you've missed the entire point of my post.

We have a non-product and no evidence of whether it even exists, much less price, features, availability, etc and we already have analysts projecting that Apple will play a major role in the market. That builds up ridiculous, unrealistic expectations that Apple couldn't possible meet - which means more 'Apple fails to meet targets' headlines in the future.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #10 of 106
i am buying two of these Apple Televisions as soon as they come out.

i'm psyched!!!!

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply
post #11 of 106
Why do analysts insist on being dumb?

This makes FAR more sense as an updated AppleTV set top box. You could duplicate the functionality quite easily, and it would speed adoption.

Right now, the AppleTV still feels like a beta. AirPlay mirroring isn't quite fully baked; it's like 95% of the way there, and once it gets to 100%, it will be a game changer for games.
post #12 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

He sees Apple's so-called "smart TV" carrying a price as high as two to three times greater than competing LCD TVs. But he thinks Apple will be able to justify that price, and find success with consumers, with the company's brand, its "unmatched aesthetics, expansive digital ecosystem and overall quality."

This makes sense on paper only.... people shop piecemeal. The cost of all their TV accessories my be much higher than their tv set but bundle it all together and they won't pay
post #13 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by kube View Post

The current apple TV is really nice. I don't think many would pay 3x standard TV cost for Apple's turn-key approach. Its not clear to me why expanding the current apple TV and having it plug into a 'dumb' screen isn't a better way to go. The value of putting Apple TV into the display is pretty small, inflexible and expensive.

I'm inclined to agree with you. An upgraded Apple TV with Blu-Ray, Ethernet, Airport, HDMI, and cable tuner would do nearly as much - but the initial audience would be much greater (no need to wait until someone wants to replace their TV). It would also allow Apple to leverage their experience and would undoubtedly provide greater margins. Simplicity wouldn't be harmed much - plug HDMI into your TV and set the TV to HDMI input and everything else could be managed from the Apple TV.

But I have no idea what Apple's plans are. Maybe they've got something great up their sleeve. Maybe they don't. And, frankly, I don't really care. Wake me up when there's a real product.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #14 of 106
I like my iphone and ipad but am not that impressed with the ATV. What it does it does well but unless you only want the content on Apples menu it is pretty limited. For a $100 gadget it's OK but I certainly wouldn't buy a TV with the same limitations.
post #15 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

That number, $100 billion, was the total yearly HDTV market...no one was suggesting that Apple would take over the entire market...

You're correct but the author trolled us with the headline.
post #16 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by kube View Post

The current apple TV is really nice. I don't think many would pay 3x standard TV cost for Apple's turn-key approach. Its not clear to me why expanding the current apple TV and having it plug into a 'dumb' screen isn't a better way to go. The value of putting Apple TV into the display is pretty small, inflexible and expensive.

I agree in principle; a set top box makes for easier adoption, and functionality described can be duplicated.

The AppleTV really needs an update; it still feels like a beta that's "almost there".

The only reason I see the benefit of an actual AppleTV integrated into a display is that Apple would control all interfaces; right now, you have a remote for the TV, you have to select the input from a clunky menu, etc.

It would be huge if Apple integrated everything, so you have one simple remote, easy menus, etc.
post #17 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I'm fully entrenched in the Apple Ecosystem and I don't think I'd buy one. I have a 48" Sony that is only 3 years old. I've only bought two tv's in the last 12 years. Hooking a $99 appletv up to my tv works for me personally. I wonder how many folks are clamoring for this? Maybe they don't know they want it yet?

Possibly the thing you are not thinking of is the fact that there are people out there *without* HDTV's in their home at the moment.

Just as most smartphone owners didn't see the value of the iPhone right away because they already had a device that filled what they thought were their needs, anyone who already has a big screen TV and all the various boxes and content hookups can't see any need to replace it.

There are people out there who don't have an HDTV yet and at least some of them are not buying because they don't understand what it is they need to get or find the whole field complicated and off-putting. Apple will make an HDTV with built in content and make it so simple that your grandmother will buy it.

What if they either bought Netflix or subsidised it on the TV for instance? Then any fool can buy a TV, plug it in and it already has every old movie and TV show on it you ever heard of without buying another thing. I think that would be immensely popular. Big upfront price perhaps, but once you bought it, no monthly cable bill at all.

Most of the people I know with HDTV's pay something like 30 or 40 a month for Internet and then a further 69-90 for cable or TV packages. How nice would it be to just pay for the Internet hookup? This is just another step on the road to turning Cable companies, cell phone providers, and telecommunications outfits into the big dumb pipes they should be.
post #18 of 106
No one said the TV would be limited to only working within Apple's Ecosystem.. after all, cable and public channels will need to be an option as well otherwise it really would be a non-starter... like selling hydrogen powered cars with no Hydrogen refill stations...

chicken and the egg yolk
post #19 of 106
Awesome. Apple can reinvent the 400lb trinitron era with a massive metal and glass tv set that has unparalleled glare.

Seriously though. if it turns out to be a jumbo imac lite, can you imagine how much that som b would weigh? like stupid heavy. I'll take my plastic glare free tv over anything metal and glass. That's just asking for trouble.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #20 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I'm fully entrenched in the Apple Ecosystem and I don't think I'd buy one. I have a 48" Sony that is only 3 years old. I've only bought two tv's in the last 12 years. Hooking a $99 appletv up to my tv works for me personally. I wonder how many folks are clamoring for this? Maybe they don't know they want it yet?

You rase a valid question. I like the idea of a tv with Siri interface elements: "TV, go to the Eagles game" or "TV, tape Breaking Bad tonight" or any of a dozen commands that force you to fumble for the remote and then hunt and peck through annoying menus...
BUT, if Apple can make that happen with a $100 add on box, why would people pay an extra thousand or two?

Also, Apple has made a killing on consumer items that we replace or upgrade every year or three. For most people, TVs are on an entirely different upgrade schedule. I would think long and hard before buying an Apple HDTV if I felt I was going to feel left out if I couldn't upgrade in three years!
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #21 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienzed View Post

No one said the TV would be limited to only working within Apple's Ecosystem.. after all, cable and public channels will need to be an option as well otherwise it really would be a non-starter... like selling hydrogen powered cars with no Hydrogen refill stations...

chicken and the egg yolk

yea, just like the apple tv and ipad and iphone play so nicely with other products... not.

if apple builds a tv, you can expect it to shun some existing tech that everything else in the world uses (like ir or bt radio remotes) in a way that pushes some agenda they have (sony anyone?) like airplay.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #22 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

You rase a valid question. I like the idea of a tv with Siri interface elements: "TV, go to the Eagles game" or "TV, tape Breaking Bad tonight" or any of a dozen commands that force you to fumble for the remote and then hunt and peck through annoying menus...
BUT, if Apple can make that happen with a $100 add on box, why would people pay an extra thousand or two?

Also, Apple has made a killing on consumer items that we replace or upgrade every year or three. For most people, TVs are on an entirely different upgrade schedule. I would think long and hard before buying an Apple HDTV if I felt I was going to feel left out if I couldn't upgrade in three years!

I was trying to build a Sony Tablet S app that would do just this but the morons locked the damn IR sensor so you can't write software for it; you have to use theirs. Stupid. When will these companies realize the truly good ideas come from the people, not from their overworked code slaves.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #23 of 106
You might have me sold if you add Siri to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8GriGd6vdU



For now I use Elgatos eyetv on my 24" iMac for a second TV in my Bedroom.
post #24 of 106
The problem is my current TV is lke 20 years old and is seldom turned on. So to even consider a new TV I'd have to see other compelling uses for the display. Given the right features I could see myself going for it, maybe not clamoring though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I'm fully entrenched in the Apple Ecosystem and I don't think I'd buy one. I have a 48" Sony that is only 3 years old. I've only bought two tv's in the last 12 years. Hooking a $99 appletv up to my tv works for me personally. I wonder how many folks are clamoring for this? Maybe they don't know they want it yet?
post #25 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

I agree in principle; a set top box makes for easier adoption, and functionality described can be duplicated.

The AppleTV really needs an update; it still feels like a beta that's "almost there".

The only reason I see the benefit of an actual AppleTV integrated into a display is that Apple would control all interfaces; right now, you have a remote for the TV, you have to select the input from a clunky menu, etc.

It would be huge if Apple integrated everything, so you have one simple remote, easy menus, etc.

Maybe it gets the a6 not the a5. I'd be ok with that.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #26 of 106
A TV plugged in with iOS 5, using the iPad as a giant remote with TV guide, etc. Having Siri built in so that I can ask for directions or information about anything while watching a TV show in a separate window. How about sports statistics on a player while you are watching a football game. Or perhaps answering a phone call on Face time through the set, or without, while sitting not the couch. Maybe Apple will have the 3-d thing worked out where glasses are not necessary.

Just throwing out some ideas, but the opportunities are endless using the television as the portal. I do hope that the 50" max isn't true. Need something a little larger, but sounds good overall. I was going to make a purchase of a new set this year, but I will wait a little longer.
post #27 of 106
Eh. Can't hate on the idea of a true Apple TV.

One company has to lead us to the lily white future of movies and films. Apple right now is the only possible company that can do so.
post #28 of 106
For my sins I work as an electronics engineer coding RTL for IP for SoCs that are used in DTVs. Most, if not all of these are more complicated than Apple's magical A5. They contain multiple CPU cores along with demods, dsps and frcs ( frame rate converters, the things that do all of the 240Hz post processing nonsense ). Coupled with this is platform SW to tie the entire system together.

All of this good stuff is sold in a chip that sells for 10$ per unit. I say again, 10$ per unit for a chip that is more systemically complex than your wizzy Intel CPU that sells for 150$+ This industry is broken. Big players like Intel and Broadcom have killed development of DTV SoCs. Even the mighty Samsung are losing money in the DTV business.

The only way Apple can make money out of this is to own the chain from the headend ( broadcaster/cable company ) down to the TV in your living room. People aren't going to pay big bucks for a TV, Apple logo or not. It will need to be priced aggresively to at least compete in the market although not necessarily undercut it. Revenue, as is the case for the iPod will come from the content, not the HW.
post #29 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmvsm View Post

A TV plugged in with iOS 5, using the iPad as a giant remote with TV guide, etc. Having Siri built in so that I can ask for directions or information about anything while watching a TV show in a separate window. How about sports statistics on a player while you are watching a football game. Or perhaps answering a phone call on Face time through the set, or without, while sitting not the couch. Maybe Apple will have the 3-d thing worked out where glasses are not necessary.

Just throwing out some ideas, but the opportunities are endless using the television as the portal. I do hope that the 50" max isn't true. Need something a little larger, but sounds good overall. I was going to make a purchase of a new set this year, but I will wait a little longer.

Direct TV already has the sports stats feature, but what you want out of a jumbo remote like the ipad is the ability to talk to your stupid DVR with an IR remote that has a full keyboard. Instead, apple shunned the IR remote entirely. Fail IMHO.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #30 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienzed View Post

No one said the TV would be limited to only working within Apple's Ecosystem.. after all, cable and public channels will need to be an option as well otherwise it really would be a non-starter... like selling hydrogen powered cars with no Hydrogen refill stations...

chicken and the egg yolk

That's what I'm not getting from some of the comments here. AFAIK, no other tv manufacturer has to make content deals and stuff. It would still be a tv. Screw in a cat5 and voila - cable. Apple just needs to provide EXTRA features, not strip out all features and be tied to iTunes only.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

You rase a valid question. I like the idea of a tv with Siri interface elements: "TV, go to the Eagles game" or "TV, tape Breaking Bad tonight" or any of a dozen commands that force you to fumble for the remote and then hunt and peck through annoying menus...
BUT, if Apple can make that happen with a $100 add on box, why would people pay an extra thousand or two?

Also, Apple has made a killing on consumer items that we replace or upgrade every year or three. For most people, TVs are on an entirely different upgrade schedule. I would think long and hard before buying an Apple HDTV if I felt I was going to feel left out if I couldn't upgrade in three years!

maybe it's possible to make a box that hijacks the television's controls, but that seems like it would be a "bag of hurt" with all of the different models available.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #31 of 106
Siri will be able to almost completely disintermediate Google as part of search advertising.

Why waste time entering information manually and going through a search engine, when all information can filter through Siri? Brilliant, Apple! And advertisers will be lining up like lost puppies to pay for this information.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #32 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Other than AI which says that it's a $100 B opportunity for Apple.

That aside, the number is irrelevant - you've missed the entire point of my post.

We have a non-product and no evidence of whether it even exists, much less price, features, availability, etc and we already have analysts projecting that Apple will play a major role in the market. That builds up ridiculous, unrealistic expectations that Apple couldn't possible meet - which means more 'Apple fails to meet targets' headlines in the future.

Pump and dump, baby!
post #33 of 106
much smarter to stick with the AppleTV and get better content on it. Too much overhead with Televisions, too many different sizes. Or else make an iBeamer projector and make it really portable, even integrate it into AppleTV.


That may just be the best idea I've ever had.
post #34 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Whether or not this is true is largely irrelevant at this point. The idiot analysts are already setting up absurd expectations ($100 B in revenues? Give me a break) that it will be impossible for Apple to meet. Now, if Apple only sells $50 B of HDTVs - or doesn't sell them at all but 'only' triples profit in their existing businesses, all the analysts and media can label Apple a failure again.

You must have been laying really low for the past 5 years, but Apple is now considered the biggest, baddest and most successful tech company in the world. This whole inferiority/persecution complex really must stop.
post #35 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaptainK View Post

For my sins I work as an electronics engineer coding RTL for IP for SoCs that are used in DTVs. Most, if not all of these are more complicated than Apple's magical A5. They contain multiple CPU cores along with demods, dsps and frcs ( frame rate converters, the things that do all of the 240Hz post processing nonsense ). Coupled with this is platform SW to tie the entire system together.

All of this good stuff is sold in a chip that sells for 10$ per unit. I say again, 10$ per unit for a chip that is more systemically complex than your wizzy Intel CPU that sells for 150$+ This industry is broken. Big players like Intel and Broadcom have killed development of DTV SoCs. Even the mighty Samsung are losing money in the DTV business.

The only way Apple can make money out of this is to own the chain from the headend ( broadcaster/cable company ) down to the TV in your living room. People aren't going to pay big bucks for a TV, Apple logo or not. It will need to be priced aggresively to at least compete in the market although not necessarily undercut it. Revenue, as is the case for the iPod will come from the content, not the HW.

The money will come from the advertising information that Apple will be able to provide by having a "smart" connection directly to the viewer.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #36 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Other than AI which says that it's a $100 B opportunity for Apple.

yeah, when I looked back over the article before I posted, I missed the headline...
Quote:
That aside, the number is irrelevant - you've missed the entire point of my post.

You are right, analysts will inevitabily fudge up predictions of Apple's future business which will inevitably lead to annoying stock price corrections. I just didn't see evidence of that in this article yet (outside the headline that was not the fault of the analyst in question).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


But I have no idea what Apple's plans are. Maybe they've got something great up their sleeve. Maybe they don't. And, frankly, I don't really care. Wake me up when there's a real product.

Here is where we actually disagree. This is a rumor site. You can't start carping about a rumor site spreading rumors without looking a little silly. Especially after it has just come out that Jobs was known to have been talking about "cracking" the TV problem not too long ago.

The rumors will swing from obvious to ridiculous but we usually have a fair idea of what is going to happen and when before it is all over. What tha analysts do with these rumors...well, that is up to them!
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #37 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by robogobo View Post

much smarter to stick with the AppleTV and get better content on it. Too much overhead with Televisions, too many different sizes. Or else make an iBeamer projector and make it really portable, even integrate it into AppleTV.


That may just be the best idea I've ever had.

It's so funny that you mention a projector. I thought Apple might go in that direction when it bought the "pico" domain name. It would settle the cost and space in the store issue and with many people mounting their televisions on the wall anyway, it wouldn't be too weird.
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
2010 mac mini/iPad OG/iPhone 4/appletv OG/appletv 2/ BT trackpad and keyboard/time capsule/ Wii
Reply
post #38 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

You rase a valid question. I like the idea of a tv with Siri interface elements: "TV, go to the Eagles game" or "TV, tape Breaking Bad tonight" or any of a dozen commands that force you to fumble for the remote and then hunt and peck through annoying menus...
BUT, if Apple can make that happen with a $100 add on box, why would people pay an extra thousand or two?

Also, Apple has made a killing on consumer items that we replace or upgrade every year or three. For most people, TVs are on an entirely different upgrade schedule. I would think long and hard before buying an Apple HDTV if I felt I was going to feel left out if I couldn't upgrade in three years!

Don't forget the teenage kids who now fight over the remote- Siri's brain will explode.
post #39 of 106
This will fail if you can't "cut the cord" to the cable and satellite providers for TV programming. It's what Steve DIDN'T want. He always said that unless you reinvented the entire chain and get rid of the extra boxes and remotes that it would not succeed and I agree 100%.

Of course the cable monopolies will just up their charges for broadband internet...

Bill
post #40 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Possibly the thing you are not thinking of is the fact that there are people out there *without* HDTV's in their home at the moment.

I'm one of those people. At this point I have no strong desire to buy one either.
Quote:

Just as most smartphone owners didn't see the value of the iPhone right away because they already had a device that filled what they thought were their needs, anyone who already has a big screen TV and all the various boxes and content hookups can't see any need to replace it.

You also have the issue of dealing with your local cable company. Really cable has to be one of the biggest rip offs in history. Some of us avoid new TVs simply because there is no additional value unless you contract with a cable service.

This brings up one issue, unless Apple is going to find a way to address the ethics issues in the cable industry I suspect they will be entering a shrinking market.
Quote:

There are people out there who don't have an HDTV yet and at least some of them are not buying because they don't understand what it is they need to get or find the whole field complicated and off-putting. Apple will make an HDTV with built in content and make it so simple that your grandmother will buy it.

TVs are pretty darn simple as it is, I don't think that is an issue. What is off putting is the very high prices one pays for very low quality content.
Quote:

What if they either bought Netflix or subsidised it on the TV for instance? Then any fool can buy a TV, plug it in and it already has every old movie and TV show on it you ever heard of without buying another thing. I think that would be immensely popular. Big upfront price perhaps, but once you bought it, no monthly cable bill at all.

You would still have that monthly Internet access bill. More importantly the minute you start shipping Apple HDTVs there will be complaints about bandwidth usage and lost revenue from the cable companies. The unfortunate reality is that Cable companies have a corrupt relationship with many local communities and are also the only valid supplier of high speed networking. Until the issue of reasonable high speed Internet access is addressed Apple will not be able to realize the full potential of a smart TV.
Quote:

Most of the people I know with HDTV's pay something like 30 or 40 a month for Internet and then a further 69-90 for cable or TV packages. How nice would it be to just pay for the Internet hookup? This is just another step on the road to turning Cable companies, cell phone providers, and telecommunications outfits into the big dumb pipes they should be.

That would be I seal but these companies will not give up easily. Apple would need to start acquiring such companies to force realization upon the industry that people rather not be nickel and dimmed to death. The reality is that in some locations your numbers are actually low, people spend hundreds a month and frankly are getting tired of the quality they get in return. In many locals cable companies have been loosing customers faster than they have been gaining them.

So yeah in an ideal world the cable company would be any different than you water supply. A service that in this case delivers photons or electrons to your house. Frankly I wouldn't mind paying by the bit just like I pay by the gallon for water. The rates have to be reasonable though. In the end I suspect legislation and directly dealing with corruption is in order. As big as Apple is I don't see them making huge changes in this industry even with all the cash they have.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple television with iOS, Siri & FaceTime seen as $100B opportunity