or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas - Page 2

post #41 of 112
Those presentations are to Jobs from the executives from director level up so he can shoot down ideas, like the cheap phone. And he did. Clearly. The TV idea was riddled with ? , unless they had a demo they wouldn't be anywhere on implementing it - it was for discussion. More importantly secret projects wouldn't be revealed here as the 100 directors wouldn't be disclosed on all future projects.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #42 of 112
I'm impressed the 2010 memo that has iPhone 5 features, tie everything to cloud, "HDMI Dongle" and it proves that Apples works on products years in advance and choose "no" to HDMI dongle a la Chromecast.
post #43 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

This one looks like an actual wand from Harry Potter.


What's with the candles?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #44 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnd0ps View Post

Does it vibrate?

Actually I think it does. lol.gif
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #45 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

In 15 years I don't expect TVs to be anything more than a panel of glass or other material not more than a few millimeters thick. It may not even need a power cable, and almost surely will not have much more in the way of connnectivity than a wifi chip in it. The "smart" part of a TV viewing experience will come from assorted Internet Wifi devices that beam images to it.

 

Smart TVs will be called smart because in an of themselves in one box they will a lot of functions, internet connectivity and apps. If Netflix continues to improve and eventually offers some kind of attractive plus plan with all the shows people want and there's a Netflix app and ecosystem of games and apps built into every new TV sold there will be no need or desire for consumers to want an Apple TV box. "My TV does all that stuff."

 

Because eventually everyone will have a TV like that. It's only a matter of time. It's really content dependent, but eventually someone is gonna crack this nut. Apple really has no choice but to eventually play the make-your-own-TV game. Otherwise they will be locked out by default. I'm speaking in terms of years here of course.


Edited by Ireland - 4/5/14 at 5:07am
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #46 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So you think it's just fine that the whole world knows stuff like this:

5. iOS - Scott, Joz

Strategy: catch up to Android where we are behind (notifications, tethering, speech, ...) and
leapfrog them (Siri, ...)

I'm sure Google is getting a good chuckle over that one. And what exactly has Siri leapfrogged? Certainly not Google Now.

I didn't need this email to know that.

Do you honestly think Apple does not have internal meetings where they discuss where others might be ahead of them......JUST BECAUSE it doesn't show up in their marketing or public statements???
post #47 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I'd love to know why Apple's legal tea couldn't keep this from being made public. It has nothing to do with the trial and if anything is just embarrassing to Apple. There's a reason these documents are marked CONFIDENTIAL.
There you go again with that word embarrassing. Why don't you just stop since you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
post #48 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Smart TVs will be called smart because in an of themselves in one box they will a lot of functions, internet connectivity and apps. If Netflix continues to improve and eventually offers some kind of attractive plus plan with all the shows people want and there's a Netflix app and ecosystem of games and apps built into every new TV sold there will be no need or desire for consumers to want an Apple TV box. "My TV does all that stuff."

Because eventually everyone will have a TV like that. It's only a matter of time. It's really content dependent, but eventually someone is gonna crack this nut. Apple really has no choice but to eventually play the make-your-own-TV game. Otherwise they will be locked out by default. I'm speaking in terms of years here of course.
You're speaking in terms of 10-15 years. It's not even remotely relevant. People don't buy TV's but once every 5-10 years. What you describe is irrelevant. Apple will sell a shitload of AppleTV in that time, as they can update a box every year with new hardware and content and abilities....GOOD luck updating your magical integrated TV set every year.
post #49 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

At the bottom of each page is this: Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only. I wonder who leaked this then? For me it's not the contents that are embarrassing but the fact it was made public. These things are labeled as confidential for a reason.
In the day, the existence of Little Boy and Fat Man were secret too, let alone photos of them. This is no longer the day. The email you're kvetching about is four years old. Its day is long past as well, and most of its content has come to pass. It's no longer classified or confidential; it's history. So tell me, do you think it's safe now to declassify General Washington's plans to cross the Delaware on Christmas night and attack the Hessians at Trenton? After all, we wouldn't want Ol' George to be "embarrassed."

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #50 of 112
Lawyers will warn you that if you don't want corporate secrets to come out and get a lot of publicity, don't sue or allow yourself to be sue. That's what's happening here.
post #51 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnd0ps View Post


Does it vibrate?

Lol! :D

 

 

Reply

 

 

Reply
post #52 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

There you go again with that word embarrassing. Why don't you just stop since you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
You don't think it's embarrassing that a confidential email like this gets leaked? I do.
post #53 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post

In the day, the existence of Little Boy and Fat Man were secret too, let alone photos of them. This is no longer the day. The email you're kvetching about is four years old. Its day is long past as well, and most of its content has come to pass. It's no longer classified or confidential; it's history. So tell me, do you think it's safe now to declassify General Washington's plans to cross the Delaware on Christmas night and attack the Hessians at Trenton? After all, we wouldn't want Ol' George to be "embarrassed."
I don't care how old it is. Is it has f*ck all to do with this trial and Samsung getting it made public is for no other reason than embarrassing Apple and trying to change the narrative from patent violations to Apple fearing the competition and wanting to stop a rising competitor.
post #54 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

I didn't need this email to know that.

Do you honestly think Apple does not have internal meetings where they discuss where others might be ahead of them......JUST BECAUSE it doesn't show up in their marketing or public statements???
I believe Apple has tons of internal meetings where they discuss the competition. But I doubt they want the contents of those meetings spilled across the internet for everyone to see. And this stuff is leaking to what end? Doubtful any Samsung devices will be banned and any fine they pay is basically pocket change to them. What exactly is Apple going to win?
post #55 of 112
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
it has f*ck all to do with this trial

 

That’s a good enough reason to petition for damages relating to its release, in my mind.

post #56 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

You don't think it's embarrassing that a confidential email like this gets leaked? I do.
I'd lean more your way too, tho perhaps not go as far as saying it's embarrassing. Economically Apple may (or may not) benefit but from a PR standpoint I don't really see this latest lawsuit as worth it myself. For the hardcore fans of Apple, perhaps their most valuable segment, disclosures like this openly introduce questions on some firmly held beliefs, and I'd suspect this won't be the last confidential Apple document we get to read.
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/5/14 at 9:11am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #57 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

You're speaking in terms of 10-15 years. It's not even remotely relevant. People don't buy TV's but once every 5-10 years. What you describe is irrelevant. Apple will sell a shitload of AppleTV in that time, as they can update a box every year with new hardware and content and abilities....GOOD luck updating your magical integrated TV set every year.

Not a compelling argument you're making. And I'm arguing they continue to sell Apple TV. Obviously the TV would be more powerful than an Apple TV. And yes, the way the world will very likely be in 15 years should be of interest to Apple. But depending on who innovates in this space we're more likely talking 8 - 10 years. In 8 to 10 years pretty much everyone you know will be rocking a new TV and those TVs will be smart, and will have apps like Netflix and others built in. And I it's think it's common sense to assume they'll will eventually have App Store and games etc. One of these days the idea of attaching a box to your TV will be a thing of the past? Is that, 5, 10 or 15 years away? I don't know, but I feel it's a nigh on certainty that it's gonna happen at some point. Apple should try to play its hand and push the content owners hard for a TV subscription plan, like Steve himself mentioned, so they can have a reason go-to-market strategy.
Edited by Ireland - 4/5/14 at 8:43am
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #58 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That’s a good enough reason to petition for damages relating to its release, in my mind.
I want to know how it became public. It's one thing for the lawyers and jury to have access to it but the general public shouldn't.
post #59 of 112
"Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic." Albus Dumbledore:

I see voice search as being the future of TV. There are plenty of things that voice isn’t very good at. For instance, writing this reply can be accomplished better with typing, but if I want to setup an appointment on my iPhone then Siri is how I will do that. Instead of unlocking my phone, locating the calendar app, opening it, going to the right date, creating a new appointment, adding a name for the appointment, using the dials to then set a start time, and saving it. Instead I just hold down the Home Button and saying “Set appointment for the Dentist on May 1st at 9:30am.” It will even let me know if there are any conflicts with that date and time. That’s how I want voice search to be for a TV!

I want to be able to say something like “Play season 7 episode 19 of The Big Bang Theory” or “Play the last night’s episode of Elementary” or “Play the oldest unplayed episode of The Daily Show” or even set reminders to watch a show at a particular time with “Remind me to watch the Longmire season premiere.” To me that’s just the tip of the iceberg of when the living room will finally start to become a 21st century environment.

Eventually I want to be able to say “Play at 2x speed” or “Jump back 2 minutes” or “Start scene over from the beginning” or “Pause. Identify the grey jacket worn in that scene. [This jacket is made by blah blah and retails for yada yada. Would you like me to save this search to your Reading List?] Yes. Resume playback.”


"He Who Controls The Remote Controls The Universe" Baron Harkonnen

I also want to see a way for the TV to magically alter it's layout based on the one who controls the remote. Since TVs and their boxes tend to be used my multiple people within a home but usually watched or controlled by only one person at a time, I want the remote to have biometrics that can instantly determine the user which can then alter the UI for that user’s preferences and viewing habits.

This means that when I pick up the remote it wouldn’t show (say) my young daughter’s TV shows but instead lists the shows I like to watch, the ones I’ve recorded, and even go back to where I may have stopped watching a show the last time I was using the TV. I’m not talking about a complex security like in Touch ID, although that could be an option, but more for just identifying the user quickly through a simple hash sent via BT to the primary device. This can be done by using sensors over the device's normal grip area or even having a Touch ID-like button on top that you have to actively touch. Even in the latter instance having it change everything to match your viewing habits is a time saver and major convenience.


"You Shall Passthrough" Gandolf the Grey

Any device connected to a TV via HDMI that is not the primary input source is never going to be a great device for the user. Even among those that love their Apple TV most will likely use the cable/sat digibox as their primary input on their HDTV. This input switching on the TV is long overdue to be removed. I'd love to see TV's simply become the dumb monitors they should have become years ago; meaning, we set the TV when you get it and then never alter the input. In fact, these devices get put so far in their place so far that they no longer come with remote controls because it's simply not needed.

I'd love for Apple to create a device that can be all things, but that doesn't seem like it's in Apple's DNA and the complexities of the various cable/sat standards (even just in the US) are likely too much of a mess for them to ever deal with. For that reason I'd like to at least have an HDMI passthrough on the Apple TV. This way, whatever the primary input is will be sent to the TV and the Apple TV UI will always be ready to overlay on the screen. It would at least get me to use their Apple TV more if I didn't have to go through the rigamarole of finding the TV remote and changing the input which admittedly isn't difficult but definitely is annoying.
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/5/14 at 9:44am

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #60 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
 
One of these days the idea of attaching a box to your TV will be a thing of the past

Isn't that up to the bandwidth providers? I'd think Comcast, Cox, etc. would not want to become just a dumb pipe. Sort of depends on net neutrality, which will have to overcome some pretty deep lobbying pockets to ever become a reality. Sure there will be smart TVs but the inputs and the remote will leave a lot of flexibility for users and providers to connect to all kinds of content options.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #61 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I don't know what I was expecting, but I always imagined Steve Jobs' secret list to be more imaginative and inspiring. Guess even Willy Wonka has to put his pants on one leg at a time.

In a way it's probably a good thing because it keeps taking away the idea that Apple without Steve is a company without a magic wand. They didn't have a magic wand. The team at Apple (that is still there) came up with ideas and products and they made rational decisions about the best route to customers when the technology was ready.

That should mean any company can do the same thing. They can but their motivations as a whole are different. When you look at great musicians or artists, their motivation is to focus on the certain style they want to project - like everyone, they choose an identity. Compare it to musicians that try to be like already famous musicians. They show themselves up as imitators from the outset and that's not appealing because people like things that are new (original information) and better (something that resonates positively with their own interests).

The identity people choose is going to polarize other people one way or another based on what's important to them but everyone has common behaviour patterns. We all promote originality, quality, attention to detail for example. Having something that resonates positively with people just needs you to have good taste and a respect for the art form that you align your identity with. That doesn't go away overnight. When Steve went back to Apple, he found people still sitting waiting around for the right way to communicate those values.

That's a key element that often gets overlooked. You can have a motivation that people will respect but communicate it very badly. Microsoft did this with the XBox One. Their motivation with DRM was to make content cheaper and help sustain games developers by strengthening their revenue stream against sales lost to retailers. Their communication was 'we're going to take away your cheaper used games' and there was a backlash. They of course overlooked the fact that they couldn't communicate cheaper games unless they took the step of implementing pricing rules for online purchases.

Apple's motivation with a locked down App Store is security but it gets communicated to some people as control and people resent having someone else dictate their own security model.

Google's motivation is to give people freedom and to be open about things but what gets conveyed is a lack of care because they put out products that aren't fully tested and allowing people too much freedom allows them to set their own quality bar and they end up being disappointed by it and take that resentment out on people who have it better. Another motivation is to lower cost to make technology more accessible to lower earners but they do this through advertising so what they convey is that they are happy to put a price on your identity.

When it comes to new products, if Apple doesn't sweat the details and make an original experience that is comfortable, they will communicate the wrong message. Federighi summed this up pretty well saying that making something new is easy, doing it right is hard.
post #62 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I see voice search as being the future of TV.

I want to be able to say something like “Play season 7 episode 19 of The Big Bang Theory” or “Play the last night’s episode of Elementary” or “Play the oldest unplayed episode of The Daily Show” or even set reminders to watch a show at a particular time with “Remind me to watch the Longmire season premiere.” To me that’s just the tip of the iceberg of when the living room will finally start to become a 21st century environment.

Eventually I want to be able to say “Play at 2x speed” or “Jump back 2 minutes” or “Start scene over from the beginning” or “Pause. Identify the grey jacket worn in that scene. [This jacket is made by blah blah and retails for yada yada. Would you like me to save this search to your Reading List?] Yes. Resume playback.”

Sometimes when I watch a movie and there's an actress in the background that looks really hot, I want to know who it is and it's a nightmare trying to find out who they are. You have to listen to the audio to see if they have a character name and then run through the credits trying to match them to the real name and some credits are really small. Not only that, if it's a less important role, they sometimes just call them say stewardess number 4. Then I have to Google for all the stewardess names to find the right girl.

What I want to be able to do is say "pause", "who is the girl at this location" and I'd point at the character. Then it would bring up the bio. It would save so much time. The searches currently would go like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOBzWF0Aws#t=102

but with the face/character detection, it skips right to the name.
post #63 of 112
Steve Jobs gave Apple a five-year head start in the mobile revolution and Samsung is only 18-months behind the power curve come October 5th and from where I sit, Samsung is holding a pair of queens.

My sense is, Samsung is attempting to resurrect Steve Jobs in order to glean anything of value and it's not working and it won't buy them time.

I like it though. Reading SJ's email and correspondence is fascinating, but the rolling disclosure about how his mind worked is painfully indicative of Walter Isaacson's failure to capture Steve Jobs the man.

This is good for AAPL though, it's good for all Apple consumers who admired SJ. Apple isn't giving away recipes or secrets, they have all the time and money to lead Samsung around the bend and back.

Apple would do well to encapsulate this charade in an advertising campaign of commercials to expose what it is Apple's competitors have to do to get the chance to breath rarified air.
post #64 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Most of it looks pretty standard but a few things that stood out to me were the following:



- tie products together to further lock customers into our ecosystem

This has been evident but now it's clearer that it's one of Apple's motivations.

- catch up to Android (notifications, tethering, speech ... )

There's confirmation about Apple copying Android notifications. It was pretty obvious at the time but also minor relative to the copying that went the other way.

- TV subscription, app, browser, magic wand?

After 4 years, they still haven't done any of this. I guess this is one of those areas where they won't do it until they can do it right. Getting the controls right from the sofa is key to most of this. Subscriptions and other content is down to the providers.

 

I think 'further lock customers into our ecosystem' is reaching the double-edged point for Apple.  I always thought I'd hop back to Apple once they built a bigger phone- but the thought of getting to use only what Apple allows, and knowing that trying to use anything non-Apple on an Apple phone can be sometimes deliberately cludgey (either by Apple's own doing or by their competitors design).  Knowing that I'd be buying myself back into iTunes, and then macs and possibly TV just makes me want to stay away from Apple entirely unless the phone is substantially better.  The phone is the key driver because that's the one that will drive which ecosystem(s) I use.

 

Documents on Apple referencing Android and the need to play catch-up in areas could be problematic- or at least open the doors to many years of litigation to come.  Samsung looks like they are setting up their defense to be 'its not us, its Google' and forcing Apple to go after Google.  If Apple argues 'bounce-back' is worth $40 dollars per phone and Android phones need to pay up or remove the feature- Apple could face a similar argument to remove notifications and tethering from iPhones.  Not saying its right or who would win, just that lawyers will be happy to argue it for the foreseeable future.

 

TV I think there's too much focus and competition for any one to pull off a major coup and revolutionize it.  To me, I'd like to see a shift from the broadcast/segmented mindset.  Let the content creators create.  That's what its really all about.  Take Boardwalk Empire or Game of Thrones and just make them.  Don't focus so much on making broadcast 'episodes'  Just make the serious.  When I'm ready to watch on my time, just let me say 'turn on Game of Thrones' to my phone and have the series pick up where I left off.  If I hadn't watched in a while, I won't mind if its smart enough to ask if I want a quick recap first =)

post #65 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I don't know what I was expecting, but I always imagined Steve Jobs' secret list to be more imaginative and inspiring. Guess even Willy Wonka has to put his pants on one leg at a time.
I'm skeptical that this was some secret list of Steve's. More likely it was a list culled together from all his executives. But maybe it will put to rest the idea that Steve had all these grand visionary ideas and now Apple is doomed because he's not here to to shepard them to completion.
post #66 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

I'd start with code names for competitors.
i.e.

DespicableMe  = Google
Minion = Android
Gru = Sergey Brin
Kamino = Samsung
BuyNLarge = Amazon

TheMole = Eric Schmidt
SweatShop = Steve Ballmer
UterusDischarge = Andy "I guess we're not gonna ship that phone" Rubin

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #67 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I'm skeptical that this was some secret list of Steve's. More likely it was a list culled together from all his executives. But maybe it will put to rest the idea that Steve had all these grand visionary ideas and now Apple is doomed because he's not here to to shepard them to completion.

Maybe he has an even secreter list, hidden by steganography in PNG files innocently labeled "family vacation photos". Plans for the mothership, the formula for transparent aluminum, blueprints on constructing a real RDF out of old discarded warp cores, and instructions for downloading Steve's consciousness into an old PowerMac G4 Cube are eluding the prying eyes of lawyers and competitors...

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #68 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Sometimes when I watch a movie and there's an actress in the background that looks really hot, I want to know who it is and it's a nightmare trying to find out who they are. You have to listen to the audio to see if they have a character name and then run through the credits trying to match them to the real name and some credits are really small. Not only that, if it's a less important role, they sometimes just call them say stewardess number 4. Then I have to Google for all the stewardess names to find the right girl.

What I want to be able to do is say "pause", "who is the girl at this location" and I'd point at the character. Then it would bring up the bio. It would save so much time. The searches currently would go like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOBzWF0Aws#t=102

but with the face/character detection, it skips right to the name.

Google offers just that feature, tho it's still pretty new so not available for all movies. If they don't kill it 1rolleyes.gif the service should improve quickly I would think.
http://searchengineland.com/google-answers-whos-that-actor-in-that-movie-in-google-play-tv-app-153377

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #69 of 112
sony
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

It already exists.


sony's always on Nintedos ass. Copying every bit of hardware and software they develop.
post #70 of 112
"FYI - DO NOT FORWARD"

One line down:

"Begin forwarded message:"

I don't see any item in this list/timeline that says "totally destroy the user experience of iOS devices with a horrific GUI overhaul that destroys everything about iOS that made iPhone and iPad successful".
post #71 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post

"FYI - DO NOT FORWARD"

One line down:

"Begin forwarded message:"

I don't see any item in this list/timeline that says "totally destroy the user experience of iOS devices with a horrific GUI overhaul that destroys everything about iOS that made iPhone and iPad successful".
Ah, so that's why Apple is selling more iDevices than ever and iOS 7 adoption rate is 85%. 1biggrin.gif
post #72 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Not a compelling argument you're making. And I'm arguing they continue to sell Apple TV. Obviously the TV would be more powerful than an Apple TV. And yes, the way the world will very likely be in 15 years should be of interest to Apple. But depending on who innovates in this space we're more likely talking 8 - 10 years. In 8 to 10 years pretty much everyone you know will be rocking a new TV and those TVs will be smart, and will have apps like Netflix and others built in. And I it's think it's common sense to assume they'll will eventually have App Store and games etc. One of these days the idea of attaching a box to your TV will be a thing of the past? Is that, 5, 10 or 15 years away? I don't know, but I feel it's a nigh on certainty that it's gonna happen at some point. Apple should try to play its hand and push the content owners hard for a TV subscription plan, like Steve himself mentioned, so they can have a reason go-to-market strategy.

The original poster was not talking about connecting a box to a TV. Here, I'll expand on his notion with my own meme for the future of TV, from whatever company pioneers it, but I'll assume Apple for this illustration.

Ever since the discussion of an iTV began I've been advocating for something I termed an iPanel, which as this poster has described, contains only the display panel, driver circuitry, and a wireless transceiver. Even speakers are separate. All the brains are housed in a separate component that either is also your wireless router or sits in the closet be t to your wireless router and cable modem (as mine do). No wires, no cable from the wall to a box on a shelf under your TV, none of any of that. The iPanel is light and comes in a number of sizes. You might hang them on the walls of several rooms. Your iWatch controls it and recognizes which room you are in so can be used to easily migrate your content from room to room and out to the iPanel by the pool. No duplication of the brain in each iPanel when it exists within that one box that exists within wifi range of all your registered iPanels and iWatches and iPods, iPhones, iPad, any of which can be used to control it and send data to iPanels and speakers in any room. That one box in the closet could, at any one time, be transmitting separate video and sound to multiple panels/speakers throughout the home, keeping all occupants entertained and informed. Starting to catch the vision now? And when an upgrade is needed to the brain, it's done once to one piece of equipment. Want a larger display in the bedroom? Go ahead and replace the one you have in there now with a new one that isn't made expensive through inclusion of a plethora of internal circuitry. And as long as you're satisfied with the size and resolution of the display you have in each area of the home, you don't need to change it just because there's some new tech in the brain.
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
post #73 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Roku CEO: Apple TV is essentially an accessory for the iPad.

SJ: Apple TV is a "must have" accessory for iOS devices

Guess the Roku CEO wasn't wrong all along. Time for some crow eating.

No Crow Served here.

 

I don't think Apple even paid no never mind to Roku.  Do you have a reference from Schiller or Cook mentioning Roku's CEO's statement, specifically about being an iOS accessory.

 

In fact, Roku's CEO figured it all out, and understand it more than t most AI readers.

 

People's first purchase into the Apple world will be an iPad or an iPhone.   Once you have that you will accessorize it with

Your iPad/iPhone... ($150 profit... on average)

- iTMS  (let's start at $25 profit from music and apps... a year)

- iCloud 

- iTunes Match  (10 Profit a year)

- a MacBook Air.  ($200 profit)

- a Airport Express/Time Capsule  probably $100 profit on the latter

- an AppleTV...$20 profit plus leading to painless  purchase of video content... let's say $40 profit a year... forever.

    (give away the razor,  make your profits on the blades).

 

my planning charges have Apple making about $175 a year off every adult  buying an iPhone, and of that 25% is Apple TV related.

sell 200Million iPhones and 50M iPads... you make $10 Billion in profits just on AppleTV and presented content, if the marriage of iPhone/iPad and AppleTV is compelling.  

 

Last year:  Apple made 37Billion.  25% of that would be 9B.   

 

So Mr. Jones of Roku.  Now that you've figured out Apple's Strategy, what are you doing about your Strategy?

post #74 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Ah, so that's why Apple is selling more iDevices than ever and iOS 7 adoption rate is 85%. 1biggrin.gif

Not to mention the notion that Jobs was for skuemorphism and would likely not have green lighted the iOS 7 rethink. Thus, iOS 7's high adoption rate illustrates that it wasn't all about Steve Jobs. There were, and still are, many folks at Apple carrying on the good work Steve Jobs demanded and inspired.
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
post #75 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

Not to mention the notion that Jobs was for skuemorphism and would likely not have green lighted the iOS 7 rethink. Thus, iOS 7's high adoption rate illustrates that it wasn't all about Steve Jobs. There were, and still are, many folks at Apple carrying on the good work Steve Jobs demanded and inspired.

Nonsense, Apple is doomed both in this lawsuit and in the market. /s
post #76 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
 

 

Smart TVs will be called smart because in an of themselves in one box they will a lot of functions, internet connectivity and apps. If Netflix continues to improve and eventually offers some kind of attractive plus plan with all the shows people want and there's a Netflix app and ecosystem of games and apps built into every new TV sold there will be no need or desire for consumers to want an Apple TV box. "My TV does all that stuff."

 

Because eventually everyone will have a TV like that. It's only a matter of time. It's really content dependent, but eventually someone is gonna crack this nut. Apple really has no choice but to eventually play the make-your-own-TV game. Otherwise they will be locked out by default. I'm speaking in terms of years here of course.

3points

 

1) once everyone sells a TV like that, the profits will drop in the race to the bottom.  Then Apple has no choice but to sell a device that just plugs into your HDMI port... Oh... it already did that.

 

       I think the converse will have to happen... the 'experience' is defined, and then built into the TV chassis.  Sort of like iOS for Autos, and even there, it's just a firmware interface.

 

2) The corp who cracks this has to sell more than TVs or cable channels

 

3) The problem is the existing distribution contracts.   The Long Game is that someone will have to 'break even' for a few years until the critical mass of devices are distributed to bypass the cable spigot,  and then show the content creators, that the intermediate content distributors (cable/network), are the money grubbing scum that they are.   Contracts will change from 'exclusive' to non-exclusive rights, and then everyone's playing on a level field.

 

 

Apple and Amazon are the only players I see that can afford the 'long game', are comfortable selling HW as 'ancillary' not 'profit making,' and have the retail/e-comm infrastructure to make content acquisition painless.   Netflix is really no different than Fox or Starz or HDnet, just with a different distribution stream.   

 

Where I agree with you is not clear in your discussion

 

4) the winner will be the one that creates the 'magic wand'  that consumers use to find what they want to watch, control the entire acquisition and display cycle, and is customizable to the individual holding it.

 

Personally, I think that wand will have a TouchID on it (Daddy wants to watch Death Race 2000, Mommy wants to watch Scandal, and little Joey gets ScoobyDoo meets the Aliens... and no one gets the 'wrong stuff').

post #77 of 112

In the context of accurate history... Apple DID leapfrog Android since Google Now didn't come until later. Also regarding Maps (aside from initial launch woes and inaccurate data from third-party sources) they also leapfrogged what Google had in terms of 3D on the phone. Google caught up pretty well, although Siri is still pretty great.

post #78 of 112

I don't think Apple will sell the panel for one major reason... you can't sell it in an Apple store. Imagine trying to sell 60" panels and walk out of the mall.  It's all sorts of logistical issues. But an AppleTV you can throw in a small bag and go home. This makes TV panels "dumb" so the price drops out the bottom which doesn't really affect Apple at all.

 

However, another argument is that technology is basically to a point where you're not going to see a ton of upgrades for hardware, but with software. So if Apple stuck an A8 in a TV with a set resolution, they can be about guaranteed that will last for 8-10 without need for a hardware upgrade. Again, I don't think Apple is going to do it that way, but they could. Of course the panel would be bloody expensive to do this since we are used to bargain basement electronics in TVs, but the TV would last.

post #79 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

What I want to be able to do is say "pause", "who is the girl at this location" and I'd point at the character. Then it would bring up the bio. It would save so much time. The searches currently would go like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOBzWF0Aws#t=102

but with the face/character detection, it skips right to the name.

 

So instead it would be something more like this. ;)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmf0F7JxxXE&t=0m18s

"Proof is irrelevant" - Solipsism
Reply
"Proof is irrelevant" - Solipsism
Reply
post #80 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Google offers just that feature, tho it's still pretty new so not available for all movies. If they don't kill it 1rolleyes.gif the service should improve quickly I would think.
http://searchengineland.com/google-answers-whos-that-actor-in-that-movie-in-google-play-tv-app-153377


That's the problem with most of these services. They are so limited that it makes it easy to forget they exist. It has to be something that works well.

Now I don't expect that this would work for every video everywhere, but if a company like Apple, Google, Netflix or Amazon announces this feature I'd like it to work for their respective content libraries. We're not talking a lot of data here. We're probably talking about something as simple as a timestamp with an ID and general grid location in the metadata. The local system could then use simplified facial recognize to simply box off the face itself without the grid info in the meta data indicating the specific size of the face for the overlay. The ID could then be pulled with an internet connection. This would likely be smaller than a subtitles file.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas