Tim Cook hints that Apple plans to redefine the television set - Page 4

 

Dual 10MP, low-light cameras… in a TV?

Note that "redefine the TV set" is not the same as "planning a TV set".

I'd like to see a side mounted Siri button that you can depress with your index finger instead of using your thumb.

I'd also like to see that fingerprint scanner tech they bought used not for security but so whomever had possession of the remote control last will have their settings, shows, history, auto-selected to idealize the UI and make it easier to navigate.

The first time I saw a Scamsung Smart TV interface I couldn't believe it, it was so like the Apple TV one I actually thought for a moment it was a an Apple TV running. It's unbelievable how they simply rip off everything Apple designs.

Talking about the cute little remote ... I want the Apple remotes to show up in a 'FindMyRemote" page on my iPad or Mac that is so close up it can show you which room and which sofa they're hiding under! (I kid about the proximity but one can hope).

Plus I would love Apple to sell add on dongles that also show up that I could add to my car keys and the cat etc.

 

Inconceivable.

Good edit!

Search for the Samsung remote control that looks like an iPhone 4.


I'd make it more simple than that since the remote won't need a GPS and it wouldn't be powerful enough to really be accurate for which couch cushion it's under. I'd rather just have a wireless receiver and speaker/circuit that can emit a loud sound when you depress a button on the TV/Apple TV.

Good idea on the noise, plus a button like that in the cat bowl!

I hate the Apple remotes so far. They're great for portable use, but damn is it anti-ergonomic.


Power button used to be the middle of the d-pad, but that got changed to select for rearranging tiles.


Those things failed anyway. Only movies use that ratio, and quite a lot of them don't.

 

OH! Okay, so just bring that back (hold down Menu) and we can remove the dedicated power button.

 

All one of them. Wasn't it just LG that made one? 

 

1) My guess is it will not have Siri.

2) It may have FaceTime, it may not, what I don't get is how that's any more useful than using any other device for FaceTime, it seems odd, to me. Especially that you'd have to either go over the stand in front of the TV camera, or be tiny in the living room, on the other end.

3) App Store, yes.

4) Meh

5) Yes, it will have iCloud

6) You don't need to record shows stored on a server.

7) No inputs, period, well, besides those for a surround sound system and an ethernet for those on a wired connection, etc. Perhaps an SD slot, but doubtful.

8) No inputs. (read: control) This device will be very-Apple, it will be locked down like Fort Knox, of which the benefits will be, security, simplicity, cohesion of product and a seamless and integrated experience. If they build it, they will come.

Edited by Ireland - 12/7/12 at 9:01am

 

So what's your take on content? In what format is that served?

There is another solution. The system will recognize faces then zoom and crop in to the appropriate distance. If there are multiple people in the room you would use the remote control's left/right buttons to switch the focus from user to user. I seem to recall they have a patent or two on this very thing.


I see that you've now removed your sig that previously stated there would be no inputs. Zip, zero, zilch. Now you are suggesting there will be some but don't have any way for content to come in via cable or satellite. Do you really think Apple is going to ignore these content distributors completely, especially cable which also supplies the internet? I think it's more likely Apple will work with them instead of closing them out... much in the same way Apple didn't close out carriers when it invented the iPhone.

 

That's the puzzle I'm hoping Apple has solved (be it app channels or a TV subscription contract, where they have all those shows people need). But I do expect this TV to the full locked down.

 

I know that patent, yes, but the whole thing seems like pure yuck!

 

How dare I change my sig.

 

 

 

No. I do not. Clearly they need TV shows, Im well aware of this. What they have in mind is anyone's guess. I hope they were able to negotiate something meaningful. They no doubt know this product is dead in the water if they were not. And in fact, an idea I had recently, whereby you get two options, you can pay full price for the TV (1,299, for example), or a reduced price with a TV with contract (499, for example), this would be an ideal go to market strat. 

Edited by Ireland - 12/7/12 at 9:20am

I have only used the new ones, so it took looking at the table in http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3176
for me to understand what you are talking about. I think it is more likely that Apple retained using the select button for pause/play to make it easy for
people who used the white plastic remote previously. (I am assuming by "silver thing" you mean the select button in the center of the navigation arrows).

I thought at least one other company made one, maybe Sharp?

I can't fathom how your take away was that you should never change your sig as opposed to what I thought was an obvious comment as a backpedal on your previous and quite adamant comment that the connection on your mythical Apple HDTV was a power plug.

That's a serious departure from your past stance but audio is the least of inputs to worry about as there are enough high end devices with AirPlay that could make this work quite well. You really should be more concerned with how HD video data will stream to the device without any blocking and who will provide this data. Since you have stated there are no inputs then there is no way to connect to your cable company so you somehow expect Apple to be one, supply an attractive model that replaces it, or someone convince all users to buy a la carte.

Power was the only cable you said it would have. You originally even stated that it would have no Ethernet.

Contract with whom? Who would supply the internet? What is the model you propose for this setup? How would this affect the current paradigm where the TV content distribution in the US is often responsible for the internet access as well?

Ireland, let's have a recap...

A little over a year ago the Steve Jobs biography came out where Steve Jobs talked about how he "cracked the nut" in regards to TV. You think all this nut cracking was to simply take an Apple TV, stick it in a HDTV, remove all the inputs and call it a day. If that's a complex and difficult hurdle for Apple to overcome then I wonder how you can get dressed each morning on your own.

This is what you wrote, "By Apple making an actual TV you end up with no inputs, one remote, one TV, cool hardware design and superb software design."

I replied with, among other things, "So if you agree with Ireland's stated vision then you can't have any inputs for cable, sat., game consoles, Blu-ray/DVD players, TiVo/DVRs. You get nothing but this Apple HDTV and what it connects to and he nor anyone else has stated they have an idea of how Apple could work with content owners and/or content/internet providers to make this dream a possibility. This is why this idea of putting one box in another and calling it a day is such a juvenile and myopic viewpoint of how technology works and evolves. If you add inputs for these other devices you end up with the same complexity you have now."

As well as with this post asking you the same questions I have asked you again to help get your grey matter thinking of the actual issue instead of your unimaginaitve and insatiable desire Apple logo on every electronic device in your home: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/134914/google-tv-gaining-android-market-simpler-interface-with-new-update/40#post_1977461

Ireland I think you are totally wrong on the lack of traditional TV inputs - to put it simply its not a TV unless it has a TV input. That used to be a cable to an external ariel - they could in the digital age drop that, but it has to be some kind of input, these days HDMI. The secret of the decoding is proprietary to whatever box is connected to the device. Without that, its not a TV. It just wont sell. 

 

If successful they can go with the TV App idea, but they need to release without it. Do you think people in Ireland would buy a TV without inputs from UPC, saorview, or SKY+ or other providers, free, satellite or Cable?

Edited by asdasd - 12/7/12 at 12:02pm

I also think that the simple input is speech. We know that Siri is not up to scratch but the reality distortion field in Apple may have missed that - in any case voice control over a TV is simple. The FaceTime thing will not just work, but be the future, in fact I have seen it in dozens of sci fi movies and TV shows.

 

With facial recognition the camera could - as people have said - zoom into a face ( not too close now) or recognise that there are a lot or faces and zoom out. You wouldn't need this all the time - if you have a phone you could answer there - it would "ring" on both devices, but it would be good to talk to 2 or more people at once. At christmas, birthdays etc.

But, but, but..... ....it's just a big iPad you control remotely....  

 

Did I? When did I state it would have no Ethernet? I never said, "it will have no Ethernet port", and besides, that would be for a wired internet connection. I think we can agree that whether it does or does not have a Ethernet, that won't dramatically change the product. Basically, it'll be like an Apple TV box, but without the HDMI port, for obvious reasons. Why are we even wasting time talking about this? What you're basically asking me is, do I think you'll be able to plug in other boxes, like PS3s, Cable boxes and DVD players, to which I would say, no. N. O. I could be wrong, but that's what I think.

 

And yes, for the vast majority of people it will have no ports, because they'll never use the audio or Ethernet ports. Most people won't even know what they are for, and that is if it even ends up having an Ethernet port, like the Apple TV. It probably will, though, but this is ultimately irrelevant in the bigger picture.

 

EDIT: I can't right-click on a word in the comment box, it's doing my head in. Makes me want to shoot my face off with a shotgun, grrr.

Edited by Ireland - 12/7/12 at 2:46pm

 

Yes, although I'd hope you agree, at least you have the decency to see that it clearly what I was on about.

 

Or a bigger iPod touch without a touch screen :P

Does HDMI cable send a signal both ways? I run my TV through a home theater AV/R. That's an HDMI from cable box, to AV/R, then HDMI out to TV. Plus an Apple TV and a PS3, same set up. If the TV is generating the sound, as it seems would be the case with an interactive TV, how would would that coordinate with an AV/R serving all the other devices to the TV, while the TV is sending sound to the AV/R but not the picture?

It looks like HDMI 1.4 supports an Audio Return Channel just for that purpose. I don't know how well it is supported, but it is necessary to make a smart TV work with an external A/V system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#ARC_and_HEC

Ye, you did. Me and others went over it with you to make sure you weren't just being lazy in your writing so you wouldn't come back with a "that's not what I meant" comment. You were so adamant about there being no inputs on the TV that you even quoted another poster in your sig who was making sure he was reading your fantastical comment correctly. Only now, more than a year later are you stating that isn't what you meant.

Well, I don't consider an Ethernet port or an audio port an input (I meant external box inputs, obviously), I was referring specifically to HDMI ports, and their equivalents. Why are you nitpicking, anyway? Why no talk about the important stuff, like the fact that I believe the TV will be full locked down? (asdide from its App Store)

So now you're trying to say that you meant that with an Apple TV built into a TV that there would be no reason for an HDMI cable to come of the TV just to go back into it? That's just bullshit! You know very well that all ports are input and/or output. Your comment was that the whole thing would only have that single power cable coming out the back like in iMac photos from Apple, expect the option to have any other ports wouldn't exist.

OK, dude. I guess you win. You're always right, anyway.

Please! Spare us your martyrdom. If you make a claim stand by it. If it's an opinion then state it as such and note when your opinion has changed. If you state why it has changed you can gain credibility for communicating your reasons. Many posters here disagree with my positions (and I with theirs) but they at least go to the trouble of formulating rational and in-depth argument to support their positions. You could learn something from those posters, and in turn they will learn something from you.
Edited by SolipsismX - 12/7/12 at 7:29pm

But no specific rules the screen needed to follow. They have to follow the aspect ratio and resolution of the competition.

 

I stand by it. No inputs. No HDMI inputs. Jesus dude, that IS what I meant. Don't believe me if you don't want to. You're wrong. You're nitpicking. Look at the current Apple TV, it has both an Ethernet port and an audio line out. You'd want to be retarded to not think the TV would have those. Yet, not many people will use them. Why doesn't the TV need an HDMI port when the Apple TV does? Because the TV is self-contained, and doesn't need to connect to another TV. I'm stating that, so you don't try to nitpick that, also. I shoudn't have to, but for you, I will.

 

No cable, no PS3, no Xbox, no Wii, no BD player, no inputs. This is exactly what I meant. Read: no inputs, meaning no HDMI ports. Deal with it. I'm not changing my mind.

 

When I said "no inputs, just a power lead", had you ask me to clarify that statement, or said, "what about my surround sound system?", I would have said, well obviously the TV will have a facility for such a thing. Anyway, the audio port is an OUTPUT, not an input. And it doesn't step on Apple's toes at all, so they would offer it, to make the TV accessible to more people.

 

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEANT. I NEVER CHANGED MY MIND.

 

I'm not saying I never do change my mind, but in this case, I definitely didn't.

 

We can argue back and forth about this all day, but you'll still be wrong that I flip-flopped on this, because I didn't. Go on continuing to believe what you want.

Edited by Ireland - 12/8/12 at 6:42am

I would bet that the number of people willing to forgo all their other video devices is so small that it's delusional to expect there be no HDMI inputs. Especially given how clumsy and limited the current AppleTV lineage is.

An HDMI audio back channel offers a wider range of options than TOSLINK does. If there's a down side to having an HDMI input, you haven't convinced anyone.

 

You might be right. We'll see. If I know Apple, this thing will be locked down like Fort Knox. But yeah, it will need to be truly compelling to get people to put it in their living room, if it does indeed ship totally locked down, like I believe it will.

 

That's not my job.

 

But, if I had to bring up a download on the consumer end, I would say adding 1, 2 or any HDMI ports adds complexity.

 

People round here will argue that it wouldn't add complexity, but I believe it does.