This story reminds me of the title of someone's autobiography: "Too little, too late, blurt out first and think later, FAIL... (or something along those lines).
This story reminds me of the title of someone's autobiography: "Too little, too late, blurt out first and think later, FAIL... (or something along those lines).
"And think later?? I think you are giving him too much credit.
and when you can buy an AppleTV for $229, who is going to pay a bigger premium extra price for an Apple HDTV instead? makes no business sense. if you have extra bucks to spend, instead you buy a bigger screen, which does make a real viewing difference.
I agree with your very valid points. I love my Apple TV but I don't necessarily want to "purchase" iTunes video content that I can get for free and streamed from Hulu. If Apple keeps morphing the Apple TV and adding more and more streaming features, then it's the way to go and let consumers continue buying the latest TV's from the current crop beating itself to stay in the market with little margins. Unless Apple has some unknown killer streaming widget that no one else has access to that can only be found on a Networked TV from Apple.......then it's a game changer. The market said the same thing about the 1st gen $499/$599 iPhone and look how many they sold.
...Not sure Apple wants to get into a very low margin business like Networked TV's.
The personal computer market has just as low margins, yet Apple has managed to make a niche for themselves at the consumer high end.
It's all about doing it right, and I don't see a bunch of TV manufacturers, led by yet another web search company, breaking into the applications realm with a flawless concept.
According to this paradigm, the Apple TV-set may already be in full production in the form of the new round of iMacs -TV screen sized, HD resolution, wireless KB and mouse standard, game-console class processing power, wall mounted, 21" and 27" but no desktop sweet-spot 24".
What if they just released ATV 4.0 firmware/software for both AppleTV and iMacs? Then turn the iPod touch into a next gen controller.
They could do it tomorrow.
(Next introduce larger screen sizes >40" and a more powerful AppleTV)
I've got an Apple TV in my home theater for renting HD movies a la carte. I've also got a Mac Mini in my family room attached to my FPTV which I use for streaming video content from Hulu, You Tube and other sites. And I just purchased a new Panasonic FPTV that supports streaming widgets (Viera CAST) as well such as Weather and Bloomberg. Apple would have gotten my hard-earned dollars if they offered a networked TV that supported not only iTunes but Hulu as well as I'd like to get rid of the Mac Mini in the family room and have most of the features I want supported via the TV. It's the way of the future and the TV manufacturers have a lot to lose if they don't get it right. LG, Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony and now Vizio are all on 1st/2nd gen networked TV's. They have the lead but will not necessarily hold it. Not sure Apple wants to get into a very low margin business like Networked TV's.
When Comcast "Buys" NBC, Hulu will be a paid service and any others will have to quickly find ways of monetizing their business model. To date, the free with web advertising model is losing money, web advertising is not enough (as the publishing industry is discovering, hence Rupert Murdoch's anti Google tirade)
Broadcasters, Networks and Cable providers are positioning themselves as we speak to pull the rug out from under any "free" service. Believe me if we all move to "streaming" and try bypassing cable they'll find a way of owning the options as well. Cable providers in particular will never be happy with you just paying for their ISP. They need content and they need advertising/ an audience to advertise to. The latest advertising tech is perfect for this sort of distribution, but like everything else the tech is still evolving, even if everyone is clamoring to get it to market and make the money.
Point is, the market is a "mess", Apple has "plenty" of time to figure it out especially when you consider they were the first to even bring a paid download/ subscription model to the industry and back then everyone laughed. There was no ROKU before ATV, there wasn't a slingbox, hell there wasn't even an ATV when Apple first introduced TV downloads. There was satellite TV and Tivo. Game changers in their day but their day appears to be fading.
Apple has to be working on a major overhaul of AppleTV. the current hardware still runs a Tiger OS and its chips can't handle 1080p. with only 256M of RAM it can't do much on-board, which is why all the interesting hacks like ATVFlash don't work good consistently. it's out of date, really old hardware.
Rather than mimic other set top boxes with DVR and other stock functions, Apple could make it possible for a Leopard-based ATV to run iPhone apps, using your iPhone/touch (or iTablet) as the remote control. that would suddenly leap it far, far over the capabilities of all the other widget-offering HDTV's, light years ahead. it would also solve the crucial problem of the TV on-screen UI that is what really limits popular use of new features. the current cursor controls are just too much trouble to use for anything complicated - once you have to enter text, forget it. and attempts to link TV's with wireless keyboards/pads just have not been popular.
We have a couple of the Samsung sets in our office with this feature. Underwhelming at best. Designed to compliment TV content rather than supplant it. Had hoped to use it to basically run a video sign driven by a web page, or as a centralized system to display PowerPoint presentations in the conference room without a computer.
I remember years ago, my father had dial-up WebTV. I used to watch him and affectionately think to myself, 'Great not only am I going to be bald, but stupid, too!'
WebTV was horrible, then MS bought it and a year or two later it was....er.....gone! So was my Dad!
Very funny... but are you certain your thoughts were affectionate? Be honest George Costanza.
Because Steve Jobs is obsessed with Apple control. Read this months Fortune magazine as it explains how it worked for the iPhone and failed on the AppleTV.
Steve Jobs may be obsessed with control but I think what what most people fail to understand is that SJ (Apple) is never interested in joining a party just for the sake of it. Call it a need to control if you like but I think the issue has much more to do with wanting to make a difference. It is just too boring to make a product or service unless it will be better than what is there already. Better also means more interesting and different. Ask a top designer or artist to create something run of the mill and ordinary and they will probably yawn and glaze over. Its just not what makes them tick. I am sure Apple always can and often I wish they would but from their pov, if it ain't interesting, what's the point?
I bet their real intent is to make it possible for people to get information on the product placement items in the tv programmes and impulse-buy through the tv before the rush of enthusiasm wears off, even as the programme is still running.
There was no ROKU before ATV, there wasn't a slingbox, hell there wasn't even an ATV when Apple first introduced TV downloads. There was satellite TV and Tivo. Game changers in their day but their day appears to be fading.
Roku ACTUALLY built some of the first internet radio adapters to stream music BEFORE Apple TV box was introduced. They were the only iTunes (DAAP/RAOP) capable streaming devices before Apple kept upgrading iTunes to newer versions (and protocol security keys) and Roku just couldn't keep up with releases so they went underground, little revenue from audio streaming only devices, and re-surfaced a couple of years back with the Netflix streaming box. Roku has probably sold 1/2 million of these single app devices but with networked TV's from Samsung and others supporting the Netflix app directly, I see this device becoming extinct.
I agree with a lot of your comments about the industry in turmoil and how to monetize "free" streaming. Hulu will become a paid subscription app like everything else but it's clear that the broadcasters are all eager to keep consumers on their internet sites and will continue to offer "free" streaming of popular shows so I can continue to get my content directly from them. And only watch what I want to watch whenever I want. The Cable and Sat TV services need to re-think their strategies. Paying $60/month for basic cable just to get HD stations that are already free OTA is outrageous.
In any case, I'll keep my Mac Mini connected to my FPTV until a viable option becomes available whether it's from Apple or other (Sony?).
Apple has to be working on a major overhaul of AppleTV. the current hardware still runs a Tiger OS and its chips can't handle 1080p. with only 256M of RAM it can't do much on-board, which is why all the interesting hacks like ATVFlash don't work good consistently. it's out of date, really old hardware.
Rather than mimic other set top boxes with DVR and other stock functions, Apple could make it possible for a Leopard-based ATV to run iPhone apps, using your iPhone/touch (or iTablet) as the remote control. that would suddenly leap it far, far over the capabilities of all the other widget-offering HDTV's, light years ahead. it would also solve the crucial problem of the TV on-screen UI that is what really limits popular use of new features. the current cursor controls are just too much trouble to use for anything complicated - once you have to enter text, forget it. and attempts to link TV's with wireless keyboards/pads just have not been popular.
maybe in January?
I could certainly see an iTablet (much rumored) for control at your fingertips. Going even further, include one of the better Wireless HD (WirelessHD or WHDI) interfaces to send signals wireless to a Apple monitor supporting such an interface. Now that would be cool.
Steve Jobs may be obsessed with control but I think what what most people fail to understand is that SJ (Apple) is never interested in joining a party just for the sake of it. Call it a need to control if you like but I think the issue has much more to do with wanting to make a difference. It is just too boring to make a product or service unless it will be better than what is there already. Better also means more interesting and different. Ask a top designer or artist to create something run of the mill and ordinary and they will probably yawn and glaze over. Its just not what makes them tick. I am sure Apple always can and often I wish they would but from their pov, if it ain't interesting, what's the point?
You misunderstood me - I said Apple control- the closed ecosytem of Apple products.
No thanks....I will wait for Apple's version. It will be done right!
Just wait until people start getting "blue screens of death" during the Superbowl or the season finale of 'Lost'... pandemonium and Congressional inquiries!
I bet their real intent is to make it possible for people to get information on the product placement items in the tv programmes and impulse-buy through the tv before the rush of enthusiasm wears off, even as the programme is still running.
Sure! This is coming as well. As you are watching a show streamed from iTunes, a user can use his controller (iPhone/Touch/iTablet) to point-n-click on an item in view which is then accessible in a folder for viewing later. Call is iGear tagging. Apple gets into another revenue stream the retailers are more than happy to pay.....
Handango.com was a cross-platform app store before Apple had an ipod.
Yes, and the entire industry certainly fell in line behind that, didn't they?
Why is so hard to tell the difference between "did something in some form" and "actually changed the industry in a way that caused the other players to follow suit"?
Yes, and the entire industry certainly fell in line behind that, didn't they?
Why is so hard to tell the difference between "did something in some form" and "actually changed the industry in a way that caused the other players to follow suit"?
Handango has download more app (and will continue to) then Apple will in the next two years. You need to grasp facts. Not your McDonalds parking lot monkey spank.
Oh, and downloading apps to a moble devices is definitely revolutionary!!! I wonder how Apple came up with it. I'm impressed.
Comments
This story reminds me of the title of someone's autobiography: "Too little, too late, blurt out first and think later, FAIL... (or something along those lines).
"And think later?? I think you are giving him too much credit.
Also, I can't see them doing a full on TV. Adding such things to the Apple TV box and letting you use any TV you want seems more likely...
Yeah, Apple would NEVER force customers to buy a computing device with an integrated monitor just to increase their profit margin...
Apple is never going to make its own TV's.
and when you can buy an AppleTV for $229, who is going to pay a bigger premium extra price for an Apple HDTV instead? makes no business sense. if you have extra bucks to spend, instead you buy a bigger screen, which does make a real viewing difference.
I agree with your very valid points. I love my Apple TV but I don't necessarily want to "purchase" iTunes video content that I can get for free and streamed from Hulu. If Apple keeps morphing the Apple TV and adding more and more streaming features, then it's the way to go and let consumers continue buying the latest TV's from the current crop beating itself to stay in the market with little margins. Unless Apple has some unknown killer streaming widget that no one else has access to that can only be found on a Networked TV from Apple.......then it's a game changer. The market said the same thing about the 1st gen $499/$599 iPhone and look how many they sold.
...Not sure Apple wants to get into a very low margin business like Networked TV's.
The personal computer market has just as low margins, yet Apple has managed to make a niche for themselves at the consumer high end.
It's all about doing it right, and I don't see a bunch of TV manufacturers, led by yet another web search company, breaking into the applications realm with a flawless concept.
According to this paradigm, the Apple TV-set may already be in full production in the form of the new round of iMacs -TV screen sized, HD resolution, wireless KB and mouse standard, game-console class processing power, wall mounted, 21" and 27" but no desktop sweet-spot 24".
What if they just released ATV 4.0 firmware/software for both AppleTV and iMacs? Then turn the iPod touch into a next gen controller.
They could do it tomorrow.
(Next introduce larger screen sizes >40" and a more powerful AppleTV)
I've got an Apple TV in my home theater for renting HD movies a la carte. I've also got a Mac Mini in my family room attached to my FPTV which I use for streaming video content from Hulu, You Tube and other sites. And I just purchased a new Panasonic FPTV that supports streaming widgets (Viera CAST) as well such as Weather and Bloomberg. Apple would have gotten my hard-earned dollars if they offered a networked TV that supported not only iTunes but Hulu as well as I'd like to get rid of the Mac Mini in the family room and have most of the features I want supported via the TV. It's the way of the future and the TV manufacturers have a lot to lose if they don't get it right. LG, Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony and now Vizio are all on 1st/2nd gen networked TV's. They have the lead but will not necessarily hold it. Not sure Apple wants to get into a very low margin business like Networked TV's.
When Comcast "Buys" NBC, Hulu will be a paid service and any others will have to quickly find ways of monetizing their business model. To date, the free with web advertising model is losing money, web advertising is not enough (as the publishing industry is discovering, hence Rupert Murdoch's anti Google tirade)
Broadcasters, Networks and Cable providers are positioning themselves as we speak to pull the rug out from under any "free" service. Believe me if we all move to "streaming" and try bypassing cable they'll find a way of owning the options as well. Cable providers in particular will never be happy with you just paying for their ISP. They need content and they need advertising/ an audience to advertise to. The latest advertising tech is perfect for this sort of distribution, but like everything else the tech is still evolving, even if everyone is clamoring to get it to market and make the money.
Point is, the market is a "mess", Apple has "plenty" of time to figure it out especially when you consider they were the first to even bring a paid download/ subscription model to the industry and back then everyone laughed. There was no ROKU before ATV, there wasn't a slingbox, hell there wasn't even an ATV when Apple first introduced TV downloads. There was satellite TV and Tivo. Game changers in their day but their day appears to be fading.
Rather than mimic other set top boxes with DVR and other stock functions, Apple could make it possible for a Leopard-based ATV to run iPhone apps, using your iPhone/touch (or iTablet) as the remote control. that would suddenly leap it far, far over the capabilities of all the other widget-offering HDTV's, light years ahead. it would also solve the crucial problem of the TV on-screen UI that is what really limits popular use of new features. the current cursor controls are just too much trouble to use for anything complicated - once you have to enter text, forget it. and attempts to link TV's with wireless keyboards/pads just have not been popular.
maybe in January?
It is possible to do the latter but not easy.
I remember years ago, my father had dial-up WebTV. I used to watch him and affectionately think to myself, 'Great not only am I going to be bald, but stupid, too!'
WebTV was horrible, then MS bought it and a year or two later it was....er.....gone! So was my Dad!
Very funny... but are you certain your thoughts were affectionate? Be honest George Costanza.
Because Steve Jobs is obsessed with Apple control. Read this months Fortune magazine as it explains how it worked for the iPhone and failed on the AppleTV.
Steve Jobs may be obsessed with control but I think what what most people fail to understand is that SJ (Apple) is never interested in joining a party just for the sake of it. Call it a need to control if you like but I think the issue has much more to do with wanting to make a difference. It is just too boring to make a product or service unless it will be better than what is there already. Better also means more interesting and different. Ask a top designer or artist to create something run of the mill and ordinary and they will probably yawn and glaze over. Its just not what makes them tick. I am sure Apple always can and often I wish they would but from their pov, if it ain't interesting, what's the point?
There was no ROKU before ATV, there wasn't a slingbox, hell there wasn't even an ATV when Apple first introduced TV downloads. There was satellite TV and Tivo. Game changers in their day but their day appears to be fading.
Roku ACTUALLY built some of the first internet radio adapters to stream music BEFORE Apple TV box was introduced. They were the only iTunes (DAAP/RAOP) capable streaming devices before Apple kept upgrading iTunes to newer versions (and protocol security keys) and Roku just couldn't keep up with releases so they went underground, little revenue from audio streaming only devices, and re-surfaced a couple of years back with the Netflix streaming box. Roku has probably sold 1/2 million of these single app devices but with networked TV's from Samsung and others supporting the Netflix app directly, I see this device becoming extinct.
I agree with a lot of your comments about the industry in turmoil and how to monetize "free" streaming. Hulu will become a paid subscription app like everything else but it's clear that the broadcasters are all eager to keep consumers on their internet sites and will continue to offer "free" streaming of popular shows so I can continue to get my content directly from them. And only watch what I want to watch whenever I want. The Cable and Sat TV services need to re-think their strategies. Paying $60/month for basic cable just to get HD stations that are already free OTA is outrageous.
In any case, I'll keep my Mac Mini connected to my FPTV until a viable option becomes available whether it's from Apple or other (Sony?).
Apple has to be working on a major overhaul of AppleTV. the current hardware still runs a Tiger OS and its chips can't handle 1080p. with only 256M of RAM it can't do much on-board, which is why all the interesting hacks like ATVFlash don't work good consistently. it's out of date, really old hardware.
Rather than mimic other set top boxes with DVR and other stock functions, Apple could make it possible for a Leopard-based ATV to run iPhone apps, using your iPhone/touch (or iTablet) as the remote control. that would suddenly leap it far, far over the capabilities of all the other widget-offering HDTV's, light years ahead. it would also solve the crucial problem of the TV on-screen UI that is what really limits popular use of new features. the current cursor controls are just too much trouble to use for anything complicated - once you have to enter text, forget it. and attempts to link TV's with wireless keyboards/pads just have not been popular.
maybe in January?
I could certainly see an iTablet (much rumored) for control at your fingertips. Going even further, include one of the better Wireless HD (WirelessHD or WHDI) interfaces to send signals wireless to a Apple monitor supporting such an interface. Now that would be cool.
Steve Jobs may be obsessed with control but I think what what most people fail to understand is that SJ (Apple) is never interested in joining a party just for the sake of it. Call it a need to control if you like but I think the issue has much more to do with wanting to make a difference. It is just too boring to make a product or service unless it will be better than what is there already. Better also means more interesting and different. Ask a top designer or artist to create something run of the mill and ordinary and they will probably yawn and glaze over. Its just not what makes them tick. I am sure Apple always can and often I wish they would but from their pov, if it ain't interesting, what's the point?
You misunderstood me - I said Apple control- the closed ecosytem of Apple products.
No thanks....I will wait for Apple's version. It will be done right!
Just wait until people start getting "blue screens of death" during the Superbowl or the season finale of 'Lost'... pandemonium and Congressional inquiries!
I bet their real intent is to make it possible for people to get information on the product placement items in the tv programmes and impulse-buy through the tv before the rush of enthusiasm wears off, even as the programme is still running.
Sure! This is coming as well. As you are watching a show streamed from iTunes, a user can use his controller (iPhone/Touch/iTablet) to point-n-click on an item in view which is then accessible in a folder for viewing later. Call is iGear tagging. Apple gets into another revenue stream the retailers are more than happy to pay.....
Very funny... but are you certain your thoughts were affectionate? Be honest George Costanza.
Hey, Hi there children, It's time to play follow the leader!!
Handango.com was a cross-platform app store before Apple had an ipod.
Handango.com was a cross-platform app store before Apple had an ipod.
Yes, and the entire industry certainly fell in line behind that, didn't they?
Why is so hard to tell the difference between "did something in some form" and "actually changed the industry in a way that caused the other players to follow suit"?
Yes, and the entire industry certainly fell in line behind that, didn't they?
Why is so hard to tell the difference between "did something in some form" and "actually changed the industry in a way that caused the other players to follow suit"?
Handango has download more app (and will continue to) then Apple will in the next two years. You need to grasp facts. Not your McDonalds parking lot monkey spank.
Oh, and downloading apps to a moble devices is definitely revolutionary!!! I wonder how Apple came up with it. I'm impressed.