Samsung says an Apple television won't beat them in picture quality - Page 4

That's certainly not my ownership assessment, given that my Galaxy Tab 10.1, 8.9 and Galaxy Nexus have much better contrast and color fidelity than either my iPad, iPad 2, iPhone 4 or iPhone 4S, with blacks so dark on my Galaxy Nexus as to barely be discernable from the screen's black border.

Sure... My IPhone edges out my Galaxy Nexus by 10 ppi in pixel density (far less than the advantage my Galaxy Tab 8.9 or 10.1 has over the iPad - BTW), but that's at the sacrifice of having a mere 3.5 inches of touchscreen real estate vs 4.65 inches, and in real-world use one can't tell the difference anyway.



I have little doubt that whatever Apple brings out for a TV, it''ll be very nice, but Samsung's definitely ahead of the game when it comes to display technology.

Sorry if this has been said already ... This sounds like a parallel to RIM telling Apple they knew nothing about phones ...

Keywords were "used to"

Since when it become acceptable to count sub-pixels the same was as pixels? What makes your comment hypocritical is that you would have never counted them the same way if an Apple product used PenTile.

Plasmas beat them both. I'm curious though, TVs are sold at a low margin, will Apple follow suit?
How many of us actually use a TVs UI? I have my cable box, and my PS3/blu-ray/DVD/Netflix/hulu player hooked up. The TVs interface never comes into play. An Apple television set will have to be so much more than a lesser priced but equally as good TV with a Apple TV box plugged into it.

Agreed, If Apple decides to price iTV like cinema displays they'll get laughed out of the business. The appletv is perfect device to expand, especially if you want to attach it to an hd projector instead of a tv.

Exactly, I use the Sky decoder/PS3/Blu-ray/DVD for the interface, and receiver etc for sound, the TV just displays stuff. And how do you upgrade this all in one AppleTV? What happens when Apple releases a new CPU, do they expect you to purchase a whole new TV?

Samsung picture quality is great, as long as you want everything to look like a Mexican soap opera.

The advantages and disadvantages of AMOLED including the super and plus versions) are largely matter of taste and what you are using them for. A lot of people find the colours over-saturated and having a very good black is only relevant if you have a lot of black in the picture. Generally they are better for viewing pictures but worse for viewing text, particularly black on white text.
The Tab 10.1 and 8.9 don't use AMOLED but PLS which is Samsung's version of Super IPS, the newer version of what Apple uses. It has no real difference in black level/contrast but superior brightness and viewing angles. This is largely negated on the 10.1 (and possibly the 8.9 - I've never seen one) by the fact there is a noticeable gap between the LCD and the glass which reduces both. It also leads to display distortion when the screen is touched (so called Newton's Ring's)

For what I use my devices for, Apple's screens are better.
Your mileage may vary

i think if apple makes iTVs, there will be:
1. APP store: games are first, it will replace ps2/3
2. Subscription: this will replace TV boxes of course…
i don't think apple will just launch a dumb TV…

Absolutely.
I f*cking hate the stupid remotes I have for TV stuff
I would love to be able to say "Siri record the whole series of Doctor Who" or "I want to watch the Manchester United match"

What is this "competition"you speak of?

Xoom? Tab 10.1?

To quote Jon Gruber, we'll see what kind of "claim chowder" this looks like in a year or three....

^^^ This.

Rather than "bench racing" and quoting the specs of my TV to my pals, I would be much more interested in a TV option which allowed me access to the individual content options that I really WANT. My hope is that Apple will be able to convince some of the bigger content providers to offer their content through this (alleged) Apple TV, without having to subscribe to a DirecTV or cable package.

My next set will provide good/great picture quality. But to be quite honest, I'm not interested in getting one JUST because it takes it to the nth degree. Content! Give me a great, classic movie on TCM or AMC (through iTunes or whatever), rather than a set that allows me to count the rolls of fat on Bristol Palin while she horse trots in some goofy dancing contest.

This reminds me very much of what the CEO of Palm said when Apple's first iPhone was announced. He dismissed the possibility that Apple could be a threat to their business, because they (Palm) had "years of experience" building smart phones...

.. but they might have the content.
YouTube didn't become a world hit because of picture quality.
Samsung's getting worried is justified.

PS2 is 10+ years old, PS3 is 5+ years old. Apple will never make an "iTV" this is a preexisting trademark, but if they are to make an embedded AppleTV, how do you upgrade the hardware when they release a new CPU etc? After all the hardware doesn't last forever



In the future maybe, but not at the moment.


Nope, they will release a new ATV device, connected to someone elses TV, they can't produce a "TV" any better than the existing companies

I currently have to use at least 2 remotes to watch my tv. The 'universal' remote Dish Network provided only controls about 1/2 of the features of my tv and audio tuner. And if I use the AppleTV or PS3, I'm up to 3 remotes.

A simplified interface system would be a wonderful thing.

i meant with the game console which includes ps3, wii and xbox


do you seriously upgrades the CPU in your tv? or do you really upgrades the game consoles that often? i think normally to upgrade game console need 3-5 years



that maybe true but timing will be perfect to launch together with iTV if they launch



that is a good idea

BS! In terms of picture quality Samesung has nothing on the Sharp ELITE. 10k in picture quality R&D LOL. right. Then why do the copy everything everyone else does and offer no innovative features?

The iPhone was a hit because the "smart" phone marketplace was in its infancy and every competitor who came after pretty much sucked. The television market is not the same. Yeah, a lot of people will say "comcast sucks" or whatever, but they're complaining about the quality of service, not the basic mechanics of watching TV.

I'm sure this thing will be very clever, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the "problem" with television that Steve Jobs solved was "how do we turn a set monthly charge into a constant revenue stream?"

No. A lot of TV's have remotes with way to many buttons on them, but nobody ever see's the button until they get it home. Some have overy complex menu's but generally you would never go into them anyway, an Apple TV is likely to just not offer these menu options as Apple's version of making things simple is to remove functionality.

The guy is right, all people look at when buying a TV is what's the picture like and does it have enough ports for my stuff.

I'll reserve a final opinion until Apple actually announce something, but I can't help but think of what a great success the Apple HiFi was!

Is the 'smart tv' not in it's infancy as well? I would argue that it is and there is a great deal of opportunity for Apple to do to the TV as it did with the smart phone. That is, borrow the ideas that have worked in the first generations of smart tv's, expand on them with the Apple Magic (tm), and bring them into the mainstream.

The beauty of Apple's position is that a very large base of their users will jump on their new products with little skepticism- people trust that Apple makes products that they will enjoy using- Apple has consistently delivered that experience in the past. I have no doubt that the iTV can gain traction quickly and at least have a very good shot at being a great success.

Obviously, there are some key differences between the TV industry and the cell phone industry- and I can't see Apple achieving the same success here, but it will certainly be an interesting ride!

No one thought the smartphone industry was nascent until Apple turned it on its head.

The same could happen to the TV if Apple entered because smart TVs are still new, unpopular, and generally suck. And by suck I mean the HW and OS running the smart TV is not well thought out.

Actually, I think his main supposition can be called into question - picture quality is probably not the main concern of most TV buyers. For all the fuss Samsung is making about picture quality, it is both very subjective, and not relevant if no one is watching the set because of difficulty accessing content. If Samsung were that clearly dominant in picture quality and picture quality were that important to the average consumer, they would dominate in a market of very similarly designed, similarly interfaced, similarly priced televisions...but they don't. So, there must be other factors that are just as important in the average consumer's purchasing decision.

Watching television requires that one be able to find content that they want to watch and then properly configure their TV to watch it. That is becoming increasingly difficult with the multitude of input options, streaming services, set top and cable boxes, etc.

In my own modest setup, for example, I can watch over the air television, cable (DirectTV), DVR'd Direct TV, streaming/PPV movies from DirectTV, DVDs, DVDs through my Xbox, Netflix or other XBox live video content through my Xbox, photos, video, or audio streamed from my Mac through the XBox, or photos from from the TVs built in card reader. Note, I don't have a Bluray player or other internet streaming device like an AppleTV or Roku, or multiple game systems.

That's a ridiculous number of options - so many that it's difficult to determine if I already have, have access to, or can get access to content that I may want to see. And even if I can get access, I have to know how to switch inputs and configure the necessary components to watch the show. While I am comfortable doing that, people who are unfamiliar with my system/remotes can't do it without guidance.

For the reasons outlined above, vastly improving the user experience by increasing ease of accessibility to content/ease of use is where Apple could gain traction in the TV market.

Well considering the only real company still making plasmas is Sharp - their statement is nothing if not hypocritical.

So all the women are super hot? I'd sign up for that

Yea, the nerve of someone else making money other than Apple.

I have a 6-7 yr old plamsa and the picture quality is still better than the current LCD/LED sets out now.

Well, Samsung may win prices (Windows and PC makers also won many prices over the years) but they do not have the best picture quality by far. Sony is reasonably good in LCD and as far as basic picture quality goes before you meddle with algorithms, no LCD yet beats a good Plasma. Full OLED or something like that will be needed for that.

Still, how can they say this? They have no idea what Apple is up to. Maybe Apple has come up with a superb Plasma screen with top of the line algorithms to handle picture quality. Or something even more wild. Belief in their own superiority is not a good start for competition.

Panasonic is making plasmas. And since they also took over the Pioneer plasma (now Panasonic PDP) they have the widest and best range of plasmas, I think. There are quality issues in production afaik, but if you have a good one, the picture beats any LCD.

I'm afraid reality proves him wrong. Most TV's sold have in fact terrible picture quality, and they are sold nonetheless. Most people have no idea about picture quality and neither do most consumer organizations that put out tests.

So, I think that if Apple has reasonable picture quality, they have a shot at 99% of the market, only excluding the few who really care about picture quality.

You're right - I actually mean't to say Panasonic. When (hopefully not for years) my Kuro dies, I'll most likely get one from them.

Let's see, competitors were in denial when Apple came out with the iPod, then the Apple Retail stores,then the iPhone, then the iPad, and now we have Samsung already in denial of a product that doesn't even exist yet.
But I think they will be wrong too. Apple does everything first class. They won't make an HD set if it doesn't have or make a big difference in the consumers experience of using it. This is where Samsung is missing the point. It's not just about picture quality, it's about the total user experience with the product, not just about picture quality which can easily be done. Apple will make a TV will excellent picture quality, that's not what Samsung has to worry about.

So is there a problem with the TV's that use Samsung panels?

For some reason they aren't as good as Samsung's own brand.

Samsung really must like p*ssing off the companies that buy panels from them.

What an arrogant company.

you'll have to ask the tens of millions of people who own TVs


from where did you hear this?

They are all old devices you talk about, a replacement Apple TV device may very well replace them, because they are old. But they are also external devices which you can upgrade (replace) without having to replace your TV, hence an integrated device doesn't make sense


No, and that is the point. I upgrade the devices attached to my TV, but not the TV itself very often, and you will find that a lot of people do the same. Same goes with monitors, you will tend to upgrade the computer more than the screen it is attached to.

Who is going to pay thousands to replace a TV just so they can play a different game



iTV is a trademark in the entertainment industry, Apple won't be using it

Typical comment from you.

There is more to a TV display than the panel

i know those are old devices but all i simply meant is that apple can replace all the extra boxes which we people are having today to connect with their tvs and all those wires and boxes looks horrible


true but if they plan for this i'm sure they won't be making the upgrades the same as iPhone/iPad which you can update every year i think apple tvs will be like upgrading 5 years once




i'm just using iTV for now cos we don't have a name how to call apple tv

Apples successes came off the back of either bringing ideas to market, first (Mac)
Overhauling a nascent market (mp3, smartphone, tablet)

Some could say based upon current apple income streams, their best bets are taking nascent ideas and enriching them.

By producing a TV, in of itself, will not be first to market, or be a new area/scope. TVs, and their panels are 60+years in the making.

So to innovate, we hhave three main areas of interest.
1) apperance
2) picture quality
3) 'user experience' which includes useablity and content

They are top knotch on apperance, in a world that all tvs look like the same glossy black monstrosity, it will be interesting to see if they can come up with something differnt.

The picture quality will be limited by their suppliers ability. Sure 4k 50" screens would be nice, but it aint gonna be a great margin there. Every company manufacturing screens is suffering from low margins. Including those manufacturing screens for apple. If they make a TV, i suspect their picture quality will be good, but not extreme - its just not a worthwhile area to earn lrage margins on.

finally, its the experience. Thats the winner for apple. They have been working hard with the AppleTV, but its still not quite there - at least outside of USA, which is a stupidly large market for their products. If htey can bring this up a knotch, enrich the content delivery. That is where they win, and where htey continue consumer tie-in, with their content being avialable via their phone, their tablet, their laptop and their TV. TV's are 'simple' but by the time you include content, and content management on to of that, its a pig fit.
Content will also be a pig, because the other corporates who do not want people to drop large, mostly pointless cable fees, to have a pay as you go busiess. they can see what happened to RIAA once itunes allowed you to purchase tracks, rather than albums. They are hobbling Hulu, Netflix et al are all being throttled to slow down this losses.