Originally Posted by tangles
I believe it has everything to do with who Apple can get onboard to use the device for content distribution. If this happens and the contracts are signed, make way for the next wave of innovative change where Apple's competitors will scurry off and attempt to mimic the hardware
thinking this is the competing solution.
had it correct in Post #92
. OTOH, you appear to be fixated on the notion that Apple needs to become some sort of super monopoly in content streaming. Look, there lots of content deliverers out there. There is Apple's own iTunes Music Store. There are also Vudu, Netflix, BlockBuster, Pandora, and many more. More importantly, there are ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, HBO, CNN, Fuel, History, SyFy, BounceTV, and hundreds of others. The thing that you don't seem to grasp is that we are talking about a television set. This is the device that we use to watch the Super Bowl, the evening news, Dancing with the Stars
, and live coverage of local disasters. It is also the display for our video games, Blu-ray players, and videos of our trip to Disney World.
Do you honestly believe that Apple will go to market with a TV set that requires its owners to sacrifice their X boxes and PS3s? Will Apple require is new customers to mothball their Blu-ray players? What can possibly be so great about the rumored Apple HDTV that its owners will sacrifice their satellite dish before they make their first payment to Direct TV?
I have no inside information, but I just don't see any of this happening. Content delivery is an issue, but it is by no means the biggest issue with TV today. From where this owner sits, there are two major issues:
- Management of 1000+ channels of available news/entertainment in the living room/den
- The plethora of remote controls required to operate each content source connected to the TV
Issue No. 2 is also a management issue. That being the case, it seems that all of the issues facing the modern TV set owner are come back to some kind of management--management of content, management of hardware.
I live in the USA where all television sets are legally required to have an integrated ATSC digital tuner for terrestrial digital broadcasts. I understand that owners elsewhere have more options such as integrated FTA satellite receivers. Wherever you live, the problem gets back to management.
It is silly to proffer as a solution to the management problem that Apple eliminate options. This does not mean that Apple most support absolutely everything. Clearly not. For example, an Apple HDTV might forego S-video or composite video. However, it clearly needs HDMI, component video, and optical audio ports.
The cable providers in the USA have a Federal mandate to support CableCard-like functionality. Perhaps, Apple can build CableCard into its sets. Sony and Samsung already use embedded versions of Linux in their TV sets. Apple's killer potential is iOS. An Apple dumb TV would still run iOS behind the screen. However, an Apple smart TV would inherit the thousands of apps already available for the iPhone/iPad/iPod touch. The remote control could also be iOS-based--or you could use your iPhone/iPad/iPod touch as the remote. This would give the remote control the ability provide effectively perfect emulation of the remote control for every component in your entertainment system. It also has the potential to integrate the emulated remotes for each device into a rational and logically consistent system.