or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Macworld: Apple expected to surprise at Macworld Expo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Macworld: Apple expected to surprise at Macworld Expo

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
An unusual level of uncertainty over product announcements expected from Apple Computer on Tuesday will likely to allow chief executive Steve Jobs more room to surprise, one Wall Street analyst says.

"We believe this is likely because Apple is plugging leaks better as protecting its secrecy remains a top priority for the company," Shaw Wu, an analyst with American Technology Research, told his clients on Monday. "We therefore believe there will likely be more surprises this year."

Wu anticipates the Cupertino-based company will focus its announcements on two areas -- Macs and home entertainment. He told clients that supply chain sources have indicated that both video iPods with Bluetooth stereo headphones and cell phones are "near/at" their respective manufacturing stages.

"The very successful vPod has not had a major update since August 2005 when it was first announced," he wrote. "Our analysis in the supply chain indicates that its successor has been under development for some time and recent data indicates shifting component order dynamics."

Still, Wu said he does "not have high conviction on timing" for the availability of the devices. Similarly, he is unsure of the company's go-to-market strategy and provider model for its cell phone initiative.

Meanwhile, the analyst said its likely Jobs will announce new movie content partnerships with one or more studios during Macworld Expo on Tuesday, adding that his checks also indicate internal development of large-screen technologies to complement iTV.

"We believe iTV will be the first of many products that will place Apple in the home entertainment business in more direct competition with leading consumer electronics companies like Sony and Samsung," he wrote. "In our view, iTV is a logical extension of its iPod + iTunes and Mac franchises giving Apple a sizable head start in home entertainment with its FrontRow software, large TV content and growing movie library."

On the Mac side of the equation, Wu believes the key feature Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard will have over its predecessors is much better Windows compatibility. Despite repetitive denials on the subject from Apple's leadership, the analyst said he is "picking up the potential for full-blown virtual machine capability that will allow seamless use of Mac and Windows at the same time."

Wu recommend clients buy Apple on dips in share price. "We continue to rate Apple shares Buy with a $99 price target," he wrote.
post #2 of 46
Can anyone point me to the website with the Apple prediction drinking game? I know by now there has to be at least one out there, with some rules like:

If Apple announces a cell-phone, finish your glass.

If Apple announces they're releasing OS X for use on non-Apple computers, finish the whole bottle.

And of course, take a shot for every prediction Shaw Wu makes. Take two shots if it turns out to be true....
post #3 of 46
Would it make sense for Apple to buy Parallels?
Case for:
1. Easy, affordable virtualization is critical to Apple continuing to gain market share.
2. MS or another could buy and undermine the service Parallels is providing.
3. Without Parallels, VMware Fusion is too expensive to attract home users.

case against:
1. even with parallels, MS wouldn't control market given VMware.
2. the speed and focus of Parallels development might suffer within a larger OS-development team at Apple.

thoughts?
post #4 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...Meanwhile, the analyst said its likely Jobs will announce new movie content partnerships with one or more studios during Macworld Expo on Tuesday...

"one or more studios"??? WTF? What good is looking for movies from iTunes with just a handful of movies/studios onboard? I watched the CES keynote this morning and they appear to have a lot more networks signed up for movies than Apple does. Apple better figure out how to get the content on iTunes or just take the whole Movie section off. It's kindof shameful how little movies there have been added since iTunes started the movie downloads.
post #5 of 46
What are you talking about? Disney is there, all of it. The #1 & 2 movies of 06 are there, not to mention all sorts of children's/family movies. There is a lot of crap on iTS, so much so that I think they need to revisit site navigation--but that's another topic. Needless to say, there's a lot of stuff on there.

There could always be more, but I think they are off to a great start in the features realm. Hardly a reason to sound a death knell.

It doesn't really matter what other players in this market are out there...they aren't making any money.
post #6 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Can anyone point me to the website with the Apple prediction drinking game?...

I'm sure that if the Keynote went on around 6 or 7, there would be plenty of drinking games. Who's drinking at noon...on Tuesday?
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy View Post

Who's drinking at noon...on Tuesday?

The British.
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy View Post

I'm sure that if the Keynote went on around 6 or 7, there would be plenty of drinking games. Who's drinking at noon...on Tuesday?

Bill Gates??
post #9 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy View Post

What are you talking about? Disney is there, all of it. The #1 & 2 movies of 06 are there, not to mention all sorts of children's/family movies. There is a lot of crap on iTS, so much so that I think they need to revisit site navigation--but that's another topic. Needless to say, there's a lot of stuff on there.

Plus the same thing happened with TV programming, there was very little to start and it took a while to get what they have now. The movies section probably has more than the TV did this far along. As long as the store does well, the studios will feel pressure to join. Even one additional studio signing up is huge news.
post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by gordy View Post

Who's drinking at noon...on Tuesday?

Sheryl Crow?

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/s/sheryl+..._20124150.html
post #11 of 46
Then there's this over at Ars.
post #12 of 46
The Today Show this morning reported (from CES) an AOL & Sony partnership and wireless box designed to take some of the wind out of Apple's iTV sails. The AOL+Sony box supports streaming audio and video. I have no link at this point to post.... CONFIRMED!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #13 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavallo View Post

The British.

Who's being a nob? You! Yeh that's right immature....

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenJ View Post

Na I reckon they've got something up their sleeve- a surprise is not a surprise I you go and give it away is it? Apple have obviously realised that as soon as they put up banners and posters images will be posted here and every other Mac rumour-mill site on the net. In my opinion Apple are going to reveal something pretty big and they really want a loud cheer for it at the Keynote.

Expect the unexpected!! And I will say I told you so!

From yesterday and I will repeat it today! Expect the unexpected............no really do!

BENj
post #14 of 46
"to compliment iTV."

No, "to complement iTV."
post #15 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavallo View Post

The British.

Actually, most of Europe might have a lunchtime sniff.

However, since the keynote is on in the evening here, it's not like it's totally a social faux pas to be drinking during the keynote.
post #16 of 46
Seems like if Apple is really looking into HDTV's (as appears to be rumored today), wouldn't it make sense for iTV to be incorporated into the Apple HDTV? Sort of like a giant iMac, right? So you'd mount the Apple 46" HDTV on your wall, and iTV would be built into to (somewhere behind the screen). No box needed. Mac streams right to the TV. Maybe I'm connecting the dots a bit too much, but doesn't this seem plausible?
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavallo View Post

The British.

And the Irish, Germans and Ducth.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsflewelling View Post

Seems like if Apple is really looking into HDTV's (as appears to be rumored today), wouldn't it make sense for iTV to be incorporated into the Apple HDTV? Sort of like a giant iMac, right? So you'd mount the Apple 46" HDTV on your wall, and iTV would be built into to (somewhere behind the screen). No box needed. Mac streams right to the TV. Maybe I'm connecting the dots a bit too much, but doesn't this seem plausible?

How original.

I'd also like to point out that the title of this thread is a contradiction in terms. "Apple expected to surprise."
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of a rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post

"to compliment iTV."

No, "to complement iTV."

You know, I never noticed that before. Hurray English, the FrankenTongue.
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

How original.

I'd also like to point out that the title of this thread is a contradiction in terms. "Apple expected to surprise."

SOOOO sorry for not reading every freakin' post.
post #21 of 46
So apparently, I'm the only one who doubts Apple is investigating the HDTV market.

If TelePort (iTV) is as small as it is already, why would Apple go through all the effort of R&Ding HD TVs in order to simply integrate it with a television and then sell the damned thing? Truly, there isn't anything Apple can do about picture quality (since they aren't manufacturing the screen itself) and there is a minimal amount that Apple could do with a TV's built in UI... for adjusting menial things like brightness and contrast, woohoo.

"Redesigning" the TV will produce a product nearly identical to what is offered today. Therefore, trying to break into the HDTV market is really irrelevant. I'd just assume get a third-party TV and plug in a TelePort. The thing has such a small footprint, I couldn't care less that it wasn't integrated... and neither would anyone else.

Shaw Wu is wrong this time.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #22 of 46
"Redesigning" the TV will produce a product nearly identical to what is offered today. Therefore, trying to break into the HDTV market is really irrelevant. I'd just assume get a third-party TV and plug in a TelePort. The thing has such a small footprint, I couldn't care less that it wasn't integrated... and neither would anyone else.

Shaw Wu is wrong this time.

-Clive[/QUOTE]

Well the point is that if Apple were to do this it would differentiate their HDTV from every other one on the market. Sure Pioneer or Sony make great tv's, but they don't sync with a computer, and you can't download content from the TV. Apple's (with Front Row and iTV built in) would let you do all of that. If Steve is saying iTV is only $299, why not sell a box for all of the existing TVs to hit that market, and Apple TV's for the future. That separates Apple's TV from the rest. It's not just a TV, it's fully integrated with your computer. Done the right way.
post #23 of 46
It's been 10 years since Steve came back on board, bringing NeXT with him, His work has been done, and due to deteriorating health he will leave, remaining in a "consultant" role. Think about it, Steve did not look well at WWDC 2006, He is inviting his best friends for a "personal message",
"Steve Jobs inviting all his friends doesn't say, to me, "Steve's going to introduce something really cool for Mac-heads." It says, "Steve's going to tell us something that's personally very important to him." And that suggests either he's stepping down, or resigning a significant fraction of his responsibilities, or something along those lines."
Avi has moved on. Jonathan Ive has risen and created masterpieces.
Google is buying a majority share of Apple to break into the hardware side of the content delivery. Eric will install the new COO with Steve offering high level guidance.
post #24 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by posner View Post

Would it make sense for Apple to buy Parallels?

I don't think they need to buy the company, but that a nice investment in it would be worth the effort - and cash. The investment would provide Parallels with cash to grow their development team. More importantly, it could give Apple a blocking force to keep MS from buying the company.
Ken
Reply
Ken
Reply
post #25 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

And the Irish, Germans and Ducth.

No. The Irish will have had their fill by 9 a.m.
post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsflewelling View Post

Well the point is that if Apple were to do this it would differentiate their HDTV from every other one on the market. Sure Pioneer or Sony make great tv's, but they don't sync with a computer, and you can't download content from the TV. Apple's (with Front Row and iTV built in) would let you do all of that. If Steve is saying iTV is only $299, why not sell a box for all of the existing TVs to hit that market, and Apple TV's for the future. That separates Apple's TV from the rest. It's not just a TV, it's fully integrated with your computer. Done the right way.


Right, because no one but Apple has thought about adding Tivo like functionality to a TV and have it connect to a computer. Oh, wait, except Tivo. Oh, and several TV manufacturers do offer DVRs built into the TV set.

The problem with integration like this is the same problem with all the other A/V devices they've tried to do integration with...it just doesn't work AND isn't fiscally feasible. Most people abhor integrated solutions because they know if one piece fails, you're stuck without all the pieces, or you have to get the entire thing fixed, or replace the damaged part with a new component.

On the fiscal side, the only people who'd buy these TVs are those who want to integrate it with the computers and networks and all. So take out 90% or more of the market (sorry, but most people are NOT dying to somehow link their TVs to their computers). Then you restrict it more to just those who want to use Apple's software/hardware combination (even more lost sales). Finally, once you've got it this far, you then have to look at the TV as a TV and compare it to features and quality of the others on the market (and since Apple can't even figure out how to do multiple inputs on their monitors, what's the chance they'll make a TV that'll fit a consumer's needs?).

But most of all, none of it makes sense, since (a) Apple is NOT getting into the DVR market, and (b) even if they were, you wouldn't be able to get TV content onto your computer. Where's the money in it for them. They want you buying stuff from them. And the studios won't be happy if you're ripping content from your new Apple TV to your computer to share on the internet! So they'll give apple a word or two on that (maybe take away their content from iTMS, or not put it on).

Oh, and it can't help for Apple to get into a market Dell and Gateway are already in.
post #27 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

The Today Show this morning reported (from CES) an AOL & Sony partnership and wireless box designed to take some of the wind out of Apple's iTV sails. The AOL+Sony box supports streaming audio and video. I have no link at this point to post.... CONFIRMED!

Here's the link to an article plus video: Sony to bring Internet video to Bravia flat TV
post #28 of 46
Apple will announce the iPod phone and their own virtual phone network.

Why would they want to be an MVNO?

1. Apple wants to control the total experience.

2. The billing and support infrastructure is already there --iTunes! People think that you need a large call center to provide sales and tech support for a mobile phone network. This is only because existing mobile phones are so complicated. The iPod phone will have an elegantly simple UI. On top of that you will configure it using iTunes. You will subscribe for air time using iTunes. You will update its software using iTunes. And of course you will download iPod content using iTunes.

3. The business model is already there. --Apple makes money on iPod hardware not on content sales. Same thing with the phone. Apple will not make money on air time. They'll sell minutes at break even and make money on handset sales. This is an attractive deal for carriers because they don't need to subsidize the handsets to attract customers.

4. If you want to stay with your current (GSM-based) carrier, you can buy the iPod phone, stick your SIM card in it and you're good to go. You still manage it using iTunes but you don't subscribe to the Apple MVN.
post #29 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsflewelling View Post

Sure Pioneer or Sony make great tv's, but they don't sync with a computer, and you can't download content from the TV.

See that's exactly what I'm saying though... Why would you produce a TV that'll talk to your computer when you have the tiny TelePort box that will talk to your computer, (maybe) connect to the iTS, and interface with any TV. It just doesn't make sense.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #30 of 46
I wonder how many more of these Internet TVs are coming. I wonder why Jobs decided to preview iTV. Maybe because he knew all this other stuff from AOL, Sony, HP, etc. was coming and wanted to jump the gun so as to leverage the movie studios.

Maybe Apple needs a two-pronged approach: an iTV for all the HDTVs already in homes and an AIO. Apple could simply have a large LCD with HDMI connectors and a spot in the back to mount an iTV like a docking bay or something. The idea is maximum flexibility and choice. It'd be nice if Apple offered a 40" 1920x1080 display. A display-only approach won't quite work since the only way to make low-res content look good on such a display is to have built-in hardware that can do HD upscaling. That's one good reason for an integrated approach.
post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenaustus View Post

I don't think they need to buy the company, but that a nice investment in it would be worth the effort - and cash. The investment would provide Parallels with cash to grow their development team. More importantly, it could give Apple a blocking force to keep MS from buying the company.

While it sounds like a great idea, the problem is that once they give some financing, they're going to want to have a say in what's done and how, and the next thing you know, Apple's taking it over (ala Filemaker/Claris).

But there's not really need for an investment. If these guys sell out, there's other competitors (VMWare, for example, ain't for sale to MS, otherwise they'd be gone by now).

I certainly would NOT want Apple to buy them. I can just see the software languishing then. Or updates only being sent out every 18 months with a new OS version. Bugs never getting fixed (hell, they can't get their own bugs fixed, you think they'll fix bugs in this software?), etc.

You don't want Apple being your sole supplier of all your software, that just leaves you bemoaning the demise of your favorite app (hell, look how everyone hates it when Adobe buys up the competition).
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Apple will announce the iPod phone and their own virtual phone network.

Why would they want to be an MVNO?

1. Apple wants to control the total experience.

2. The billing and support infrastructure is already there --iTunes! People think that you need a large call center to provide sales and tech support for a mobile phone network. This is only because existing mobile phones are so complicated. The iPod phone will have an elegantly simple UI. On top of that you will configure it using iTunes. You will subscribe for air time using iTunes. You will update its software using iTunes. And of course you will download iPod content using iTunes.

3. The business model is already there. --Apple makes money on iPod hardware not on content sales. Same thing with the phone. Apple will not make money on air time. They'll sell minutes at break even and make money on handset sales. This is an attractive deal for carriers because they don't need to subsidize the handsets to attract customers.

4. If you want to stay with your current (GSM-based) carrier, you can buy the iPod phone, stick your SIM card in it and you're good to go. You still manage it using iTunes but you don't subscribe to the Apple MVN.


Of interesting note... I have a good friend I used to work with who now works as a Helio sales rep. Helio being a US based MVNO, though i'm not sure who they rent their cell towers from. When I last spoke with my friend, he mentioned that the money they charge each customer per month for a year contract pays for the cell tower rental after the first month, and everything after that is pure profit. This is obviously excluding the money on the hardware, but in other words, what I gathered from that was that (pretend its Cingular they are leasing from) Cingular only charges them roughtly 50-70 dollars for a year's worth of bandwidth for one phone. So if apple decided they wanted to make a phone, become and MVNO and not try and make much profit from anything except the hardware, they could manufacture and ipod/phone and tack and extra 50-70 dollars on the price and you would have a phone with unlimited calling for a year with nothing to worry about on a month to month basis. THis would be HUGE. You could then just renew your minutes, if you wll, each year, just like you do with .Mac. They could even lump it into .mac, which would be nice.

Imagine walking into a store, paying $400, even $500 a phone that just "worked" soon as you took it out of the box and it worked for a year. If you wanted to cancel, just dont renew, even if you did, you'd only be out 50 or so bucks for the renewal, which is more than what most people pay per month anyway. Apple might be the ONLY company in a position to do this. People arent used to spending large amounts of money on Motorola, LG, etc phones.... but people spend $300 on an ipod all the time. 100 dollars more and you could get the newest ipod, plus a cool phone, plus not have to pay a monthly rental fee and deal with less-than-trustworthy cell carriers.. count me IN! They could generate hype for the next gen of the device each year at macworld or a similar conference, and instead of renewing your minutes on last years phone, you could just buy the new one if you liked the new features enough. It'd almost be like compelling everyone who already has a working ipod, to go and buy a new one each time one is announced... almost.


my mind is aching for tomorrow to come...
post #33 of 46
I think the original article, is only stating the obvious here.

-tj
post #34 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

"Redesigning" the TV will produce a product nearly identical to what is offered today. Therefore, trying to break into the HDTV market is really irrelevant. I'd just assume get a third-party TV and plug in a TelePort. The thing has such a small footprint, I couldn't care less that it wasn't integrated... and neither would anyone else.

By your logic, Apple should not have branded any monitors either, since they were already offered by other companies (and at lower prices), they should not have created the iPod Hi-Fi since other manufactors already made them, and they shouldn't have made the iPod since there were already many companies making a portable Mp3 player.

An Apple branded TV with integrated Media Extender (iTV) would allow you to use one simple remote to control for your TV, Mac optical drive, iTunes trailers and all your stored content.

Apple CAN charge more than other vendors selling the exact same basic hardware because they provide something the other manufactures can't: seamless integration and devices that "just work".


2007 is "The Year of Integration"
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenaustus View Post

I don't think they need to buy the company, but that a nice investment in it would be worth the effort - and cash. The investment would provide Parallels with cash to grow their development team. More importantly, it could give Apple a blocking force to keep MS from buying the company.

I think they should buy Parallels--because virtualization is the future and I think it should be a core part of a modern OS.
Think about booting up OSX adding a couple of operating systems (windows xp, linux, solaris) then running applications transparently on your desktop from all the various OSes? Now that is USEFUL!

I think Parallels has some of the BEST virtualization talent available and they've built a first rate product with a great user experience and Apple would be lucky and smart to pick them up.

Now that being said I don't think they should be slowed down, they could stay a separate team from the OSX operating system group but be brought in to help develop OSX as a virtualization platform.

How many more Macs would Apple sell if they included virtualization as part of their core operating system? Me thinks lots...
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by posner View Post

Would it make sense for Apple to buy Parallels?
Case for:
1. Easy, affordable virtualization is critical to Apple continuing to gain market share.
2. MS or another could buy and undermine the service Parallels is providing.
3. Without Parallels, VMware Fusion is too expensive to attract home users.

case against:
1. even with parallels, MS wouldn't control market given VMware.
2. the speed and focus of Parallels development might suffer within a larger OS-development team at Apple.

thoughts?


I REALLY HOPE Microsoft buys Parallels.

Here's why:
1) I want the Parallels team to make a huge ass amount of money for there excellent and unrelenting effort.
2) I expect Microsoft to "start dropping the ball"; which, in my opinion, would help dual OS X/Windows users to finally stop using Windows altogether and just stick with OS X to avoid any headaches.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"..... "Our analysis in the supply chain indicates that its successor has been under development for some time and recent data indicates shifting component order dynamics."

Still, Wu said he does "not have high conviction on timing" for the availability of the devices. Similarly, he is unsure of the company's go-to-market strategy and provider model for its cell phone initiative.

Meanwhile, the analyst said its likely Jobs will announce new movie content partnerships with one or more studios during Macworld Expo on Tuesday, adding that his checks also indicate internal development of large-screen technologies to compliment iTV.

"We believe iTV will be the first of many products that will place Apple in the home entertainment business ......

On the Mac side of the equation, Wu .... is "picking up the potential for full-blown virtual machine capability that will allow seamless use of Mac and Windows at the same time."
[/url][/c]

To me Wu sounds clueless: He doesn't know whether/when the new vPod will happen; doesn't know anything about the "go-to" strategy or provider model for the phone; speculates that Apple may (one day) produce an Apple-branded HDTV (lots of people have speculated on this); and is "picking up some potential" on simultaenous use of Mac and Windows (whatever that means).

This is news!?

"Are you with me, Dr. Wu?....
Are you crazy, are you high,
Or just an ordinary guy,
Have you done all you can do....."
(sorry, couldn't resist).

post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

Can anyone point me to the website with the Apple prediction drinking game?

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/159/3...049d7241_o.jpg
>>< drow ><<
Reply
>>< drow ><<
Reply
post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

By your logic, Apple should not have branded any monitors either, since they were already offered by other companies (and at lower prices), they should not have created the iPod Hi-Fi since other manufactors already made them, and they shouldn't have made the iPod since there were already many companies making a portable Mp3 player.

Funny you should say that, because

1) I do think Apple Displays are fairly irrelevant and despite matching the style of your computer, serve no greater purpose than equally-spec'ed displays.
2) iPod Hi-Fi is a waste to anyone who owns a pair of speakers. I saved myself $300 by not buying redundant hardware.
3) unlike the aforementioned objects, the iPod brought WAY more to the mp3-player table than any device before it, and set a standard within the industry. It can hardly be placed on the same list as the ones you mentioned. I'm talking about devices that don't have well-established markets already.

And in terms of integration, the TelePort (iTV) is NOT an integrating device. It's a bridge between computer/iTS & livingroom/TV. I'll explain:
The flow chart below shows the order through which media comes from the iTS. Since we do not know whether the TelePort will be able to connect directly to the iTS, I'm showing one followed by the other. Items grouped within brackets are housed within a single unit.

BEFORE TelePort INTEGRATION:

[iTS] -> [Mac] -> [TelePort] -> [TV]
-or-
[iTS] -> [TelePort] -> [TV]

AFTER TelePort INTEGRATION:

[iTS] -> [Mac] -> [TelePort -> TV]
-or-
[iTS] -> [TelePort -> TV]

The TV components will remain strictly that. The TelePort components will also remain stictly that. There is no way to unify these two devices except to house them within a single unit. How is that any different than connecting them with cables? With the exception of possibly having two remotes, there is none.

So tell me again, why it is so imperative for Apple to place these two individual an NON-UNIFIABLE objects into a single housing?

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post

Funny you should say that, because

1) I do think Apple Displays are fairly irrelevant and despite matching the style of your computer, serve no greater purpose than equally-spec'ed displays.
2) iPod Hi-Fi is a waste to anyone who owns a pair of speakers. I saved myself $300 by not buying redundant hardware.
3) unlike the aforementioned objects, the iPod brought WAY more to the mp3-player table than any device before it, and set a standard within the industry. It can hardly be placed on the same list as the ones you mentioned. I'm talking about devices that don't have well-established markets already.

So tell me again, why it is so imperative for Apple to place these two individual an NON-UNIFIABLE objects into a single housing?

-Clive

For integration, take a look at the Mac throughout the ages. The consumer models have mostly had combined monitors and computer (the Mac ][ with an built-in keyboard). I don't think it will sell any better than it's current displays or even the iPod Hi-Fi, but I don't think you should count it out because it's not the most ground breaking idea.

1) They do offer some neat things, but for me, I agree that they aren't worht the additonal cost. They offer Firewire 400 and USB 2.0 ports on them. Not a big deal to most, but if your machine is on the floor this is a nice way to connect your keyboard and other peripherals.

3) iTV should hopefully do the same thing for Media Extenders that the iPod did for portable Mp3 players. All the reviews of the current Media Extenders available have shown taht it isn't being done right.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Macworld: Apple expected to surprise at Macworld Expo