iMac with TV functionality seen as stepping stone to Apple television - Page 2

It's not going to happen. If they are to do a TV it will be a TV.

Steve Jobs said the problem is people do not want to buy yet another box to plug in to their TV.

But I was thinking, if the iPad (or in this case iMac) had a small TV transmitter, the TV could just tune-in to it, no box required.

In October 1993, Apple introduced the Macintosh TV. As a limited edition, the LC-520 came with a cable ready TV tuner card. It was discontinued after 10,000 units.

Let's hope an iMac with integral TV functionality (if produced) fares better.

Take it from me, a filmmaker, folks don't want TV on their computer, that has failed. They want to bring content to their living room.

People psychologically equate computers with work and televisions with relaxation. People don't want the two to mix, despite all tech industry attempts to get them to do so (Six Degrees of Google TV, anyone?).

Televisions are complex enough as it is. I highly doubt making them even more complex by mating them with a fully-functional iMac is the solution Steve Jobs was referring to when he told Isaacson that he'd "nailed" the problem with TVs.

Apple may add TV functionality to iMacs (though I doubt they will), but I don't think such a device will be a stepping stone toward an iHDTV. If Apple does enter the television market, it will be a true television, with a simplified and elegant UI as only Apple would design one.

my 27" iMac running SlingPlayer (browser plug-in) already makes a great TV for the kitchen/breakfast nook where it sits. use it all the time. plus can multitask! all you need is a $150 Slingbox, and of course then can watch anywhere on anything.

and for my big screen HDTV, iPad mirroring plus AppleTV provides all the onscreen apps i'll ever want. and iOS universal remote apps (with IR blaster of some sort) can run your whole A/V setup too.

All Apple really needs to do is add HDMI inputs to Apple TV and overhaul the crummy Remote app.

it's clear almost all the pundits writing about Apple HDTV rumors don't really know crap about video and what you can already do today.

lol! As someone who sells TV's this certainly made me chuckle...

I do hope Apple release a TV set soon 'cause I'd get to demo/play on it all day

what about PVR functionality provided in the iCloud?

no need for duplicating recordings locally ... picture the advantage if heaps of people record the same TV programme ... 1 recording serving heaps of consumers on multiple devices ...

not sure about the legal implications tho!

The local OTA broadcasters all run successful ad sales programs, and the FCC "must carry" rules are the trade cable/phone companies make in exchange for their franchise monopoly on last mile delivery. So....... That's not really the nut that needs to be cracked.

The big issue is price of unbundled content when the content is " less than compelling" for a large part of the population. That's what is really bothering the content creators.

An apartment block, lots of iPads/iMacs all merrily broadcasting away. And where in this scheme is the iPad/iMac getting the material it is transmitting from, not to mention the power - in the case of an iPad?

There are two things I want from a television. The first is a system where I can program the channels in any order I want. If I want 575 on the satellite box to be number 1 I ought to be able to do that. There is software that lets people program all the memory channels on thwie ham radios on their computers and upload it. Why not for TV?

The second is to get rid of 16:9 and go 16:12. The picture will still be 16:9. But the TV would be taller. Let the bottom of the screen be used only for all the on screen junk they keep putting over the picture. Let channel ID, closed captioning and all that junk be below the screen so that I can see all of what I want to watch.

They wonder why fewer people watch TV. Part of it is because we can't watch the shows. Pop ups advertising the upcoming show keeps blocking the view.

Amazing how few people seem to be aware of Elgato tuners and accelerators and EyeTV as a useful iMac or MacBook video accessory. Sure, you have to use it with an antenna or cable input, and encrypted channels have to be piped through a set-top box. The cable providers have done their best to clamp down on access to their "premium" cable-only channels, which makes tuning them a kludgy business compared to a couple years ago. But EyeTV exports recordings to an iPod or iPad format in iTunes - 720p to be sure but much more compacted. I have more than 300 unencrypted TV shows recorded in iTunes on my iMac hard drive that we can easily view using AirPlay or Stream To Me to our iPads, iPods and iPhones, WiFi to our other computers, or Apple TV to televisions in our family room and our kitchen.

I'm not describing my approach to brag, but to broaden awareness of what's in the marketplace today. This stuff is already here, but it's all separate and complicated. Look for new products from Apple that will pull much of it together into a simple, integrated package along with all the streaming content that's out there today.

Apple may or may not add TV functionality to iMacs, but the reasoning here is specious.

There is no such thing as a 27", 42" or 50" "market." These are artificial definitions that are closer to what used to be called a "price point" than a market.

Price points are also, for the most part artificially constructed by the seller/marketer. It doesn't cost that much more to make a 70" TV than it does a 27" TV.

You know, it's actually getting kind of depressing. I realize AI needs a constant inflow of fresh blood, but by running a story on every random "prediction" by every random "analyst" the site devalues itself to the point of absurdity.

Imagining that Apple might make an iMac with TV functionality as a warmup to a full fledged Apple branded TV is about as insightful or informed as the average post in the forums. Why even bother with the whole "analyst" game? Why not just start posting articles based on what the forum members think?

"Apple seen to be putting up fleet of satellites: According to some random dude on the internet, Apple is likely to launch its own network of telecommunication satellites sometime in the next few years. The move is claimed to represent an end-run around cell carriers and ISPs, allowing Apple more flexibility in rolling out new phone and internet services."

Why not? Every bit the quality of prognostication that seems to be making up more and more of the articles at AI.

I hadn't heard that! People were wondering what the $80,000,000,000.00 was for!

iMac TV?

And all this time, I thought the iMac have always been a TV!


I'm betting on a straight-on TV, with buttonless touch remote, it's own unique OS and it's UI? Apple TV improved.

Wow, that's new. I still have my "Director's Edition" PowerMac 5500 with its tuner card sitting alongside the GeoPort... the net modem that wasn't, at 9600bps... I knew then it was the future.

OK. I've got questions, but first: here in Germany I've installed 6 Elgato EyeTV systems, 4 using satellite feeds and 2 using cable. All systems use a Mac to receive, record, play back anywhere thru-out the house, and on all iOS devices using Wi-Fi OR 3G. All are receiving paid content from Sky and Sky HD, although my first system 3 years ago was hooked up to Unity Media/Arena.

The EyeTV interface is golden in comparison to a cable/sat box.... although I think Apple themselves could do even better.

So.... Question:

What is it exactly that has you folks in the US tied to your trash cable/sat boxes? They are essentially "free" here too, but the ~$150,00 extra for a set-up above, is more than worth it... 100's more than the leased or purchased box.

Note: in all of the receiver boxes here, you need a CI-card module (legal) too decrypt the streams for Nagravision. In America, do the cable-co.'s all use something different, or are the standardized?

Curious.

BTW: I have PiP with Elgato, and use my iMac 27" as an entertainment system, since it's also hooked up to a **Teufel 2.1 BR system. I even have AirPlay installed on it. Two of my buddies use Mac mini's instead (also with AirPlay) hooked up to monster screens with Onkyo 5.1 receivers. What are we doing wrong? What are we missing... besides Netflix and Hulu which we unfortunately can't receive here?

"Our" Macs already ARE TVs and entertainment systems. The "extra" tech and software cost is negligible, and I think Apple could do all of it for a little more than $50,-/component cost.

So basically, what is it NOW that's keeping them from integrating the "missing tech" and software from the AppleTV as we know it, apart from the current size being a bit too cramped?

** Freaking GREAT sound, and also comes in stand-alone speaker set. German engineering for the win

Just saw your post after already stating the same: EyeTV is really great stuff.

So if you see this: what makes the EyeTV so difficult to program in the US?

We just slide our cards in either the EyeTV/Sat or a Terratec H7 Cable receiver (each about 4.5x7x2") equipped with a CI-module, do a channel scan.... and Voila!... it's all there to organize into favorites, smart lists, smart recording, etc. etc. Including HD channels and ESPN America/Classic.

I personally don't watch any "live" TV at all any more, excluding footy (soccer to y'all . Even NFL and CFB games I respectfully start to watch about 30-45 minutes into the game after starting a recording, just to skip all of the commercials.

Sorry, I think that might have been me.

Are you laughing at your own post???

Just in case any readers are from Germany and have read my previous post re: how great EyeTV is with a Mac...

PLEASE BE ADVISED: you must have the right tuner paired with the proper CI-module and CI Card either from Sky or from KabelDeutschland. Please check out the MacWelt.de forums for more info.

PS. OK... see? It's not as easy as it "should" be here either. I can only imagine the nightmare you folks in the states have. Regardless... I'm still curious

Heh. I think I picked that example because I vaguely remembered someone suggesting it (although I'm pretty sure you're not the only one that ever figured that would be a good idea).

But I honestly think that your idea has every bit the merit of most of the analyst predictions AI has been running lately-- better, really, because at least it thinks big and goes out on a limb, as opposed to some lame "Apple to sell more iPhones" or "Apple seen to be planning on introducing new devices sometime" type stuff.

Not 'at' what I said, no.

In the states the major cable co's fought and did everything they could to torpedo the cable card. Even after being legally required to support them getting one from the major cable companies was a pain if not impossible. To make matters worse Comcast and others are pushing some of the basic cable channels to digital. So you can use a simple tuner to access basic cable but many of those channels are being pushed to digital and will not accessible without their equipment or a cable card.

The satellite companies were left out of the standard. And due to the fact that the two major's (Direct tv and Dish) use different signal modulation and encryption no one makes (to the best of my knowledge) after-market equipment for them.

Apple could make something that supports whatever our current cable card standard is but if they don't have the caco's support it probably wont work well. Then they would need separate designs for each of the satellite systems. I don't think Apple will want to touch this mess with a 10 foot pole ( three meters for our metric friends ).

Thanks for the insightful post! .... well actually... I guess that emoticon should be , since my sympathies go out to ya all for having to deal with that BS.

Now I can understand why a large number of people on this and on other forums are calling the new Apple TV rumors BS.

BTW: a large number of the flat-screens being sold here also have built-in CI-module card slots for PayTV channels.... do you have those in America? How does that work with everyone using a different encryption card or receiver

As I stated to the Germans above, we do have to take care which module works with which card, but that's largely due to the encryption system being recently ( a year ago) mandated by law to include Parental Control PINs. That regardless of the fact that most receivers, as well as TVs have those controls built in regardless whether PayTV or not.

Anyway... I'm thinking that Apple should try and make a better AppleTV box, and leave the big-screens for the loss-leader manufacturers.

We do have the cable card slots in tv's, but its vary rare for a tv to have them, and even more rare for the cable companys to actually get you one(and heaven forbid if you want a dual tuner setup and want two cards for one set). Thats why i am excited by the RVU standard. I am planning a switch to Directv(satellite), and planning on getting their 5 tuner dvr that supports RVU. I was planning on buying a samsung that supports RVU that is coming out either this month or early next year so I wouldn't have to deal with additional boxes and remotes. I would love to see an apple set for the color accuracy and (im assuming) wonderful interface. But I think you are right, they should update the Applte tv to support RVU, cable card, or whatever the standard of choice is in a country.

The direct answer to your question (as other recent posts have noted) - is the encryption practices of various cable and satellite companies. There's one word to describe the content distribution landscape that exists today in the U.S. - chaotic. Content creators and content distributors (local signal broadcasters, cable companies, satellite delivery services, Internet streamers and God knows who else) are in the middle of a barroom brawl armed with knives and out to slit their competitors' throats.

Another individual noted that cable card technology is essentially kaput in the U.S. Years ago our previous digital recording set-top box had a slot. The latest model does not.

The cable provider named Comcast has a monopoly in my city. If you want cable, it's gotta be Comcast. Your only competitive option with a large menu of channel choices is one of two direct satellite services, either Dish Network or Direct TV. Whether cable or satellite, the signal is encrypted and you're stuck with a set-up box that is by and large unfriendly to channel selection using EyeTV. Elgato offers some workarounds but only with limited success.

Almost two years ago, Comcast started encrypting a large portion of its digital content like CNN and ESPN, which meant that subscribers had to install one of their small set-top decrypting boxes called a DTV Receiver. The first two for a household account are free, but after that you have to rent them for $1.99/month each. Just another small way to nickel-and-dime customers while further restricting content.

The Elgato tuners can tune in a number of local ATSC standard digital broadcast stations that Comcast is required by law to feed into its cable unencrypted (it's a broadcast standard called Clear QAM). These include local stations that belong to the PBS (Public Broadcasting System) network, which (fortunately for me) offer the kinds of quality programs (science, documentaries, music and drama performances) that I'm interested in saving and watching.

Again, circling back to your "difficulty" question - EyeTV software works fine for selecting Clear QAM stations, using an online TV Guide program subscription ($20/year) that updates daily all the upcoming content on Comcast Clear QAM channels in my service area. For these Clear QAM channels, EyeTV makes it easy to find and select programs for recording up to two weeks ahead.

Altogether, it's just not pretty in the U.S., with all the providers pursuing a "Screw the customer - I want mine" approach to doing business. That's what Apple and Steve Jobs were contending with.

I haven't looked closely at new tv sets for a while but I don't think the cable card slots are common, certainly in the past they were a rarity. Last I looked some tivo's (aftermarket cable/broadcast dvr) had two slots that supported cable cards.

See the difference between the U.S. and Europe is that your regulators actually enforced the rules and ours could not get the cable monopolies that they're supposed to mange to follow the rules.

What I currently do for tv is use a rooftop antennae to receive broadcast tv. Mac mini and iTunes for the few shows that are on cable that I want to watch. And for my addiction to british sic-fi and top gear its off to the torrents. Movies I either buy the dvd and rip to my hard drive or buy off of iTunes. Then access using front row.

@bigdaddyp & @Kibitzer

Thanks for the detailed run down on what is going to make bringing out a TV from Apple, just a rumor.

I can't believe for a minute that Apple would jump into that jungle... UNLESS... they had every single distributor on board from the beginning. Basically, they have to cut out "the other" middle-man, which is the cable co.'s and satellite broadcasters.

Considering that Apple's largest market is still, apart from China, America... I doubt seriously that they would forge ahead for the "rest of us". Even with ClearQAM or better, RVU which looks very promising, without the content NOW and from the day of the launch, I can't see the Big-Screen TV being better than AppleTV is now. There's just too much that Apple "could" add to the AppleTV now, in a smaller, stockable package, than dealing with the cut-throat pricing and associated costs of an actual all-in-one TV package.

If SJ meant anything by his quote, "I've cracked the TV problem".... I think it was only to state that the problem has been identified... and he knows there's a way to tackle it. Whether he or Apple alone can do that, that's the million $ question.... and again, I don't think he meant creating a TV to do that.

If we're down to talking about a box... is it possible that Apple's engineers have found a way through various technologies, to intercept the signals through HDMI or S-cable, and IR from the cable remote, to take over the functions of just about anything that passes through it? Thus having the ability to present it, record it, time-shift it using a familiar Apple UI? Naturally connected through the Internet to facilitate the EPG functions, and remote control from any iOS device?

Is that possible... or even legal within the HDMI and DMCA laws in place?

Basically, from what I can imagine, what with the mess in America re: standards... the only possible way would be to intercept the signals on their way to the AppleTV.

They don't need.... but could include an integrated webcam for Kinect-like motion control and of course Facetime; plus Siri would be available to directly control the box through any iOS device. Yes, albeit only the iPhone 4S for now while Siri is in Beta... but they "could" roll out an update for older devices once out of Beta. Again... Apple does not need to creat an entire all-in-one to do this.

Sorry for the ramble... it's basically written brainstorming

Curious as to your thoughts, if any of ya come back to check this thread.

Hmmm ... is 16:12 anything like 4:3? Just asking, 'cause that's been tried before ... besides, the reason they overlay those ads is (at least partially) so if you really like a show, you'll buy it on DVD/Blu-ray so you can watch it without those crappy ads - no way they're going to get rid of that.

Anyone interested in learning Apple's long-term goal for Apple TV just needs to go back to the original introduction in 2006/2007. Count how many times Steve Jobs refers to "widescreen TV" in his presentations. Oddly specific, that term "widescreen TV."

Apple is playing the long game with Apple TV. They call it a hobby because the Apple TV box we can buy today is not the end game.

widescreen TV
widescreen TV
widescreen TV

Considering how people continue to argue about whether or not an iPhone, an iPad or an iPod Touch is a "computer", wonder if (before or after that argument in semantics is settled) we will be arguing about what constitutes a "computer" vs. a "TV"? If that will be a topic of debate soon, I think that will be very interesting.

It's interesting (to me) because so many arguments seem based on how various devices were seen 10-20+ years ago. Yet we see how quickly technology has moved forward in that time. My iPod Touch is many times more powerful and capable than my circa 1986 Mac Plus. I guess that's why it doesn't bother me when/if it's referred to as a computer.

Though I would wait for some level of stability before buying one, I do hope that Apple is able to disrupt the TV and broadcast industries (including the distribution side), and can successfully deliver a device that will spark arguments about what it is (reminding us of the old Steve Martin/Bill Murray routine "What the heeell is that?!"). Apple has been very good at that: moving into an area where others have failed and redefining the space... turning an assumed loss into a surprise win.