or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rogers, BCE rumored to already have Apple 'iTV' prototype in their labs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rogers, BCE rumored to already have Apple 'iTV' prototype in their labs

post #1 of 79
Thread Starter 
A new report claims Canadian telecoms Rogers and Bell Canada have an early version of a much-rumored Apple television set in their labs and are in negotiations with the company to enter into a partnership for the device.

An anonymous source disclosed to The Globe and Mail that both Rogers and Bell "already have the product in their labs," the newspaper reported on Monday.

Another source familiar with the negotiations said Apple is open to working with multiple companies for its connected TV project, which some have dubbed the "iTV." The tipster indicated that Rogers and Bell had been approached by Apple during its search for partners.

“They’re not closed to doing it with one [company] or doing it with two,” the source said. “They’re looking for a partner. They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.”

All of the companies involved declined to comment when contacted by the publication. Both Rogers and Bell already have an existing agreement with Apple to offer its iPhone device on their wireless networks.

The report characterized Apple's TV project as a "large-screen iPad" for living rooms, adding that the Siri voice-recognition assistant that debuted in the iPhone 4S will likely make its way into the rumored television. It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

Insider tips that Rogers and Bell have working prototypes of the Apple television come quickly on the heels of an analyst report that specifically mentioned the two companies as likely to be on board with the project. Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said on Monday that Apple's best option may be to cooperate with existing cable operators.

“We believe it is likely to be offered by AT&T and Verizon in the U.S. and Bell and Rogers in Canada,” Misek said.

The as-yet-unconfirmed Apple television project also recently made headlines when it was revealed that Best Buy made mention in a recent survey of a "concept" 42-inch iOS-powered TV from Apple. The questionnaire said the device "finally reinvents what a TV can do" and suggested it would be priced at $1,499, support iCloud, feature remote control via iPad or iPhone, and sport an "iSight" camera and microphone.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 79
Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #3 of 79
Really hard to believe apple would be handing out prototype's of unreleased products, unless the post-Jobs Apple doesn't give a shit about secrecy.

How exactly would a Verizon/At&T serviced television work?
post #4 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

I hope it's legit. I hope Apple has given these guys actual televisions with Apple TV hardware inside.

And then they NEVER RELEASE IT. They just release an updated Apple TV. And yeah, then all these leakers get punished.

"But why build it into a TV if they were only ever going to release the box?"

To have complete control over the testing environment in which the box resides. Simple.
post #5 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I hope it's legit. I hope Apple has given these guys actual televisions with Apple TV hardware inside.

And then they NEVER RELEASE IT. They just release an updated Apple TV. And yeah, then all these leakers get punished.

"But why build it into a TV if they were only ever going to release the box?"

To have complete control over the testing environment in which the box resides. Simple.

I hope it's true actually (as I'd love one) and that the rumored 42 inch is the baby of a range going up to at least 60 inch if not beyond. The price rumored in earlier articles seems a but steep for a 42 inch to me if Apple want to own this market too in a couple of years.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #6 of 79
Its one thing to leak stuff on a forum board where you could be just writing BS and another thing to leak it to a newspaper. The best Buy leak is a control leak for disinformation, but this is serious leakage.
shame...
post #7 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

This proves 100% that it's a fake device and that Apple sent it out to catch leakers.

"Hand gestures". Really. Let's see what The Guide has to say about hand gestures:

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

A loud clatter of gunk music flooded through the Heart of Gold cabin as Zaphod searched the sub-etha radio wave bands for news of himself. The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive--you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure, of course, but meant that you had to sit infuriatingly still if you wanted to keep listening to the same program.
post #8 of 79
I'm betting this whole thing is a huge pack of lies. Of course, these numerous leaks could also be a disinformation campaign from Apple to suss out leakers.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #9 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory Bauer View Post

Really hard to believe apple would be handing out prototype's of unreleased products, unless the post-Jobs Apple doesn't give a shit about secrecy.

How exactly would a Verizon/At&T serviced television work?

I see how Bell and AT&T can deliver the feeds, but Rogers and Verizon I just don't get it. Those guys have land lines? They are going to offer wireless TV packages ?!?
post #10 of 79
There's no big mystery to what Apple is trying to do with their 'iTV'. Just take a look at Apple TV and see that you already can view programs from all the major networks by simply choosing the network. The interface is so simple to use and 'just works'. Voice and gesture recognition will only make it easier to use. As for programming, Apple wants to expand this to the point where just subscribe to different channels and/or or just TV shows. This requires disaggregating cable feeds and having the same programming stream over the internet to Apple's hardware (as I doubt cableco's will give Apple access to the encryption behind their cable boxes so that cable can be directly connected to Apple's hardware). Steve Jobs mentioned this years ago as being the huge hurdle. As broadcasters see people moving to watching shows online, in addition to delivering their won shows online themselves a la Hulu, they are looking for new revenue streams. Being able to stream directly to a TV a la Netflix in a manner which makes it very easy for consumers to operate the TV and choose programs is what iTV will be all about. The technology to stream to a TV is already there in Apple TV, Siri is already being offered on iPhone 4S's, gesture recognition is already available a la Kinect (but of course Apple will have their own) and all that is required is more content and having this all in one box.

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.
post #11 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I see how Bell and AT&T can deliver the feeds, but Rogers and Verizon I just don't get it. Those guys have land lines? They are going to offer wireless TV packages ?!?

Verizon FIOS?
post #12 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple II Plus View Post

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.

That to me is the million dollar question, and the one that remains unanswered. The only rumor that has alluded to a feature apple could actually offer the tv itself was that patent which allowed the remote to magically learn all of the connected devices.
post #13 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple II Plus View Post

There's no big mystery to what Apple is trying to do with their 'iTV'. Just take a look at Apple TV and see that you already can view programs from all the major networks by simply choosing the network. The interface is so simple to use and 'just works'. Voice and gesture recognition will only make it easier to use. As for programming, Apple wants to expand this to the point where just subscribe to different channels and/or or just TV shows. This requires disaggregating cable feeds and having the same programming stream over the internet to Apple's hardware (as I doubt cableco's will give Apple access to the encryption behind their cable boxes so that cable can be directly connected to Apple's hardware). Steve Jobs mentioned this years ago as being the huge hurdle. As broadcasters see people moving to watching shows online, in addition to delivering their won shows online themselves a la Hulu, they are looking for new revenue streams. Being able to stream directly to a TV a la Netflix in a manner which makes it very easy for consumers to operate the TV and choose programs is what iTV will be all about. The technology to stream to a TV is already there in Apple TV, Siri is already being offered on iPhone 4S's, gesture recognition is already available a la Kinect (but of course Apple will have their own) and all that is required is more content and having this all in one box.

I guess what I don't get is why it's necessary for Apple to offer the TV display itself since all this can easily be offered in AppleTV and therefore work with any set from any manufacturer. After all, all that is required is to have the feed and to control it. That can easily all reside outside of the TV as it does now with Apple TV.

Hopefully the competition will be like you and still don't get it. Has long has Google still tries to bypass cable and deliver internet only TV feeds we are ok, damage is not so bad. Thats its, they are just making another ATV2.
post #14 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I see how Bell and AT&T can deliver the feeds, but Rogers and Verizon I just don't get it. Those guys have land lines? They are going to offer wireless TV packages ?!?

So my 30/30 Mb/s Verizon Fiber Optic Internet connection is a figment of my imagination!
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #15 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

So my 30/30 Mb/s Verizon Fiber Optic Internet connection is a figment of my imagination!

Thats why I was asking if they had land lines. I have no idea I don't live in the US. If those leaks are true Apple is moving for an IPTV device, which makes sense because its next gen tech.
post #16 of 79
I wonder if the real iTV is involved in this imaginary iTV.
post #17 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panu View Post

I wonder if the real iTV is involved in this imaginary iTV.

Likely they will become involved at the appropriate time, as the Plaintiff.
post #18 of 79
Was reading the comments on the Globe and Mail. Apparently most people have no idea how undoable it is to deliver live feed over the net. Neither Cable or DSL are even close to have the bandwight for it.

People also don't seem to get that cable finally has competition.
post #19 of 79
I'm sorry, and I know there are tons of theories, but I don't believe for a second that this new TV will include a display.

The current TV is $99.
Most TV manufacturers are losing money selling TVs
Since there is no profit in a display, Apple is not going to integrate TV with a display.

Consumers will put 2+2 together....

An average price for a much better than average 50" display is about $2000, give or take a couple hundred.
+
TV costs (in its current form) $99


Then the consumer will start scratching their collective heads and say: "Hey, why am I buying this integrated TV for $3500 (which is what Apple will have to sell it for in order to keep their gross margin at ~40%) when I can get a display and an TV separately and save $1200-1300?"

I just don't buy it.


IMHO, I think it's going to be a beautiful little box (similar to the current form) with a lot of magical goodness inside (in the form of a specialized iOS) and the killer app is how you control it. That's what Steve "cracked".

Sale price.......$299

You talkin' to me?
Reply
You talkin' to me?
Reply
post #20 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

Was reading the comments on the Globe and Mail. Apparently most people have no idea how undoable it is to deliver live feed over the net. Neither Cable or DSL are even close to have the bandwight for it.

People also don't seem to get that cable finally has competition.

You talk big about other folks not getting things but you're wrong about cable bandwidth.

Where FiOS is competing with Comcast they are doing node splits to provide competitive bandwidth and reducing port congestion...or so I've been told.

Your last post regarding iptv is off the mark given you can do ip multicast (ie live feed) on docsis. With the channel bonding in 3.0 you can provide high QoS for VOIP and other more important services while providing high bandwidth services like VOD and live feeds and CCAP gear is under going lab and field trials at Comcast.

Cable has competition in SOME markets. Effectively none in others.
post #21 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter View Post

I'm sorry, and I know there are tons of theories, but I don't believe for a second that this new TV will include a display.

The current TV is $99.
Most TV manufacturers are losing money selling TVs
Since there is no profit in a display, Apple is not going to integrate TV with a display.

Consumers will put 2+2 together....

An average price for a much better than average 50" display is about $2000, give or take a couple hundred.
+
TV costs (in its current form) $99


Then the consumer will start scratching their collective heads and say: "Hey, why am I buying this integrated TV for $3500 (which is what Apple will have to sell it for in order to keep their gross margin at ~40%) when I can get a display and an TV separately and save $1200-1300?"

I just don't buy it.


IMHO, I think it's going to be a beautiful little box (similar to the current form) with a lot of magical goodness inside (in the form of a specialized iOS) and the killer app is how you control it. That's what Steve "cracked".

Sale price.......$299


Maybe, but my guess is that there are enough people out there that would rather have an Apple designed and spec'd television set where the whole experience is an Apple experience. The tv manufacturers are already trying their hardest to accomplish their own version of this - so the pairing idea of the Apple tv to a set that has a completely different gui doesn't fit in with what they are trying to do.

As far as pricing goes, Apple holds a lot of power in numbers - they've owned the iPod market, created the iPhone smartphone market as we know it today and changed the ultra portable notebook market - all with pricing that may have seemed to be higher than the competition at first, but when you compare...apples to apples (sorry, had to do it) it's clear that Apple can make more money selling at a competitive or even lower price than their competition.

I'd make the leap if they hit the magic price to performance (and visual) ratio that I'm sure they will.
post #22 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Where FiOS is competing with Comcast they are doing node splits to provide competitive bandwidth and reducing port congestion...or so I've been told.

Your last post regarding iptv is off the mark given you can do ip multicast (ie live feed) on docsis. With the channel bonding in 3.0 you can provide high QoS for VOIP and other more important services while providing high bandwidth services like VOD and live feeds and CCAP gear is under going lab and field trials at Comcast.

Cable has competition in SOME markets. Effectively none in others.

Aint multicast limited to the cable feeds? You can deliver multiple live feeds coming from the net in volume? I know Bell IPTV use multicast (for there TV feeds), but i was not going to say this here, much more easier to understand that you broadcast to nodes then stream to house then trying to explain multicast to nodes than stream to house.

If this tech is still in labs and not deploy imo lots of networks still can't handle large numbers of feeds. Would be nice indeed to be able to multicast anything the net brings, that would mean IPTV without using the ISP feeds. Lots of people want this to cut cable.
post #23 of 79
Itunes on your TV... that's pretty much it, but oh yeah, probably also email, games, internet, siri, and maybe even *gasp*, widgets on your screen, probably semi-translucent
post #24 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panu View Post

I wonder if the real iTV is involved in this imaginary iTV.

The "real" ITV is actually not spelled with a lowercase "i" and is not "the real" anything. It's just a TV station. Get over yourself.
post #25 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new report claims Canadian telecoms Rogers and Bell Canada have an early version of a much-rumored Apple television set in their labs and are in negotiations with the company to enter into a partnership for the device.

An anonymous source disclosed to The Globe and Mail that both Rogers and Bell "already have the product in their labs," the newspaper reported on Monday.

Another source familiar with the negotiations said Apple is open to working with multiple companies for its connected TV project, which some have dubbed the "iTV." The tipster indicated that Rogers and Bell had been approached by Apple during its search for partners.

“They’re not closed to doing it with one [company] or doing it with two,” the source said. “They’re looking for a partner. They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.”

All of the companies involved declined to comment when contacted by the publication. Both Rogers and Bell already have an existing agreement with Apple to offer its iPhone device on their wireless networks.

The report characterized Apple's TV project as a "large-screen iPad" for living rooms, adding that the Siri voice-recognition assistant that debuted in the iPhone 4S will likely make its way into the rumored television. It also mentioned the use of "hand gestures" to control the device, though it didn't go into further detail on what exactly that would entail.

Insider tips that Rogers and Bell have working prototypes of the Apple television come quickly on the heels of an analyst report that specifically mentioned the two companies as likely to be on board with the project. Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said on Monday that Apple's best option may be to cooperate with existing cable operators.

“We believe it is likely to be offered by AT&T and Verizon in the U.S. and Bell and Rogers in Canada,” Misek said.

The as-yet-unconfirmed Apple television project also recently made headlines when it was revealed that Best Buy made mention in a recent survey of a "concept" 42-inch iOS-powered TV from Apple. The questionnaire said the device "finally reinvents what a TV can do" and suggested it would be priced at $1,499, support iCloud, feature remote control via iPad or iPhone, and sport an "iSight" camera and microphone.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]

Anyone who thinks there is the remotest chance that any of this is true please take your current TV remote and bludgeon yourself over the head with it.

Apple is going to release a new TV but they gave prototype hardware to two Canadian phone companies first?

Apple is going to release a TV but they need partnerships not with content owners or even those with current contracts to distribute it, but two f*cking phone companies in Canada?

Apple is going to release a TV that looks like a "large scale iPad" for the living room?

This makes sense how now? Partnering with phone companies is necessary why now?

A giant iPad powered by the weak cell phone signals of two phone companies "solves" the problem of existing TV's in what way exactly?
post #26 of 79
Apple is building a fifth network.

Some of the "articles" are so far fetch, I feel like I am being troll.
post #27 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Anyone who thinks there is the remotest chance that any of this is true please take your current TV remote and bludgeon yourself over the head with it.

Apple is going to release a new TV but they gave prototype hardware to two Canadian phone companies first?

Apple is going to release a TV but they need partnerships not with content owners or even those with current contracts to distribute it, but two f*cking phone companies in Canada?

Apple is going to release a TV that looks like a "large scale iPad" for the living room?

This makes sense how now? Partnering with phone companies is necessary why now?

A giant iPad powered by the weak cell phone signals of two phone companies "solves" the problem of existing TV's in what way exactly?

Why do you assume that Bell and Rogers got it first?

Let's see. Not sure about Bell, but isn't Rogers a 'cable' company first?

And why do you think that Apple's TV is powered by 'cell phone signals'? What is wrong with WiFi?
post #28 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Why do you assume that Bell and Rogers got it first?

Let's see. Not sure about Bell, but isn't Rogers a 'cable' company first?

And why do you think that Apple's TV is powered by 'cell phone signals'? What is wrong with WiFi?

In the western half of Canada at least, neither of these companies have anything but cell towers. They are phone companies. Neither Rogers nor Bell even effectively covers my city with phone signal let alone the 50-100 Mbps required for TV

I meant "first" as in before talking to the cable companies or the media companies.

WiFi is not cell, and bandwidth is more expensive on the phone than any other way.

Again, what problems are solved by partnering with cell phone companies? (the two mentioned in the USA are also cell phone companies). What possible involvement could the phone companies have with an Apple branded television that they need prototypes of the device to test?

Remember also that according to supply chain reports, if an Apple branded TV exists it's in the part sampling, early prototype stage. Yet there is something about it that necessitates the phone companies signing off on the design?

If this is real, then it must be something completely unexpected and from further afield than any other Apple product ever known. If true it will be more surprising that their most surprising product announcement (the iPod), which was only surprising because it was an entirely new kind of device for them at the time. An Apple TV is not that. It's an expected extension of their current business.
post #29 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

The idea that Apple would be handing anyone a prototype, but especially a telecom, is so out there that I suspect that it is bogus. In fact I wouldn't be shocked if it was revealed that Apple is the source of such insane rumors because then no one will actually try to dig

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #30 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

The idea that Apple would be handing anyone a prototype, but especially a telecom, is so out there that I suspect that it is bogus. In fact I wouldn't be shocked if it was revealed that Apple is the source of such insane rumors because then no one will actually try to dig

Here's my opinion, keep in mind I don't know anything more than anyone else:
The new iTV device is could probably either be an add-on box (like the existing one) that adds the required electronics to integrate Siri (Processor capacity, noise cancelation,) Natural Interfaces (hand/face identification with cameras) and probably bluetooth remotes.
If it's an actual real TV think of a 42" iPad but instead of multitouch, it can tell peoples hand positions.

As for Bell and Rogers. Bell has both Satellite and DSL, integrating "iTV" into either connection is rather dubious. Rogers has Cable, Wireless (HSPA+/LTE.) Bell and Rogers have a WiMax network (Inukshuk) but are doing nothing with it, just sitting on the spectrum.

Both carriers are rated poor when it comes to internet speed. So even if they had such devices, unless they're willing to actually improve their networks to support television instead of complaining about bandwidth hogs, I think such rumors are far fetched.
post #31 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Anyone who thinks there is the remotest chance that any of this is true please take your current TV remote and bludgeon yourself over the head with it.

Apple is going to release a new TV but they gave prototype hardware to two Canadian phone companies first?

Maybe Apple thought it might not get out to the U.S. press, after all there is that language barrier.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #32 of 79
Why, as it is, most of the mobile companies are struggling to keep up with the data demands of smart phones now they want to serve TV programs too.. For one thing, it means more investments on the network improvements and in turn means it will cost more for consumers using their networks.. it will even affect users who don't use iTV too.. I dont think it will work that way!!. I guess time will tell.
post #33 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

I see how Bell and AT&T can deliver the feeds, but Rogers and Verizon I just don't get it. Those guys have land lines? They are going to offer wireless TV packages ?!?

Verizon FIOS.

Verizon has land lines in some places in the US and AT&T does in other areas. I can get AT&T U-Verse in my area and had them for a while. I have cut the cord at the moment though. U-Verse was okay though, better than Comcrap or satellite IMO.
post #34 of 79
iSight camera? Controlled by "hand gestures"...? Could this be something similar to the Microsoft Kinect? I remember reading that Apple were approached before MS to utilise the technology...
post #35 of 79
Hand gestures, voice control... not as simple as a channel up and down button is it?
post #36 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post

Apple needs to find the source of these leaks and fire the employees or drop the vendors responsible

I think you're a very silly person, because you take rumors at face value. You are assuming this is based on an actual leak and factual evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I hope it's legit. I hope Apple has given these guys actual televisions with Apple TV hardware inside.

And then they NEVER RELEASE IT. They just release an updated Apple TV. And yeah, then all these leakers get punished.

"But why build it into a TV if they were only ever going to release the box?"

To have complete control over the testing environment in which the box resides. Simple.

Do they typically lend prototypes in such a manner? Apple seems quite protective with this stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post

Maybe, but my guess is that there are enough people out there that would rather have an Apple designed and spec'd television set where the whole experience is an Apple experience. The tv manufacturers are already trying their hardest to accomplish their own version of this - so the pairing idea of the Apple tv to a set that has a completely different gui doesn't fit in with what they are trying to do.

As far as pricing goes, Apple holds a lot of power in numbers - they've owned the iPod market, created the iPhone smartphone market as we know it today and changed the ultra portable notebook market - all with pricing that may have seemed to be higher than the competition at first, but when you compare...apples to apples (sorry, had to do it) it's clear that Apple can make more money selling at a competitive or even lower price than their competition.

I'd make the leap if they hit the magic price to performance (and visual) ratio that I'm sure they will.

*sigh* they don't really sell at a lower price. The iphone is heavily subsidized. The Air is somewhat reverse engineered to the price point of its bottom spec. Displays are something where Apple hasn't done a very good job. The TB display has issues. The older Cinema displays had massive issues (including reliability). The original Apple lcd displays were beyond awful. Many of them broke in one to two years. i've owned plenty of Macs, but nothing would make me buy an Apple tv.
post #37 of 79
The only way I can see this happen is that Apple introduces an aTV certification program for TV set makers, to ensure that
(i) either an aTV motherboard is included in the TV
(ii) or the TV and its inputs can be properly controlled by Apple's very own aTV settop box.
post #38 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by aglove View Post

iSight camera? Controlled by "hand gestures"...? Could this be something similar to the Microsoft Kinect? I remember reading that Apple were approached before MS to utilise the technology...

Hopefully Apple holds the patents that matter
post #39 of 79
"Hand gestures". Really. Let's see what The Guide has to say about hand gestures:[/QUOTE]


I love that :-)
post #40 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

Thats why I was asking if they had land lines. I have no idea I don't live in the US. If those leaks are true Apple is moving for an IPTV device, which makes sense because its next gen tech.

I assumed that was a given.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rogers, BCE rumored to already have Apple 'iTV' prototype in their labs