Apple positioned to introduce connected HDTV within 2-4 years

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TECHSTUD View Post


    Jobs hates Blu-ray, 16:9, HDMI, web browsing in the living room, Flash, only wants you to rent or buy from iTunes, and this is to be taken seriously?



    If Steve Jobs hates 16:9, then why are all the new iMacs 16:9?
  • Reply 102 of 136
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TECHSTUD View Post


    DIdn't I tell y'all- the SONY of the millennium.

    YAWN.



    Where's my i5 13" MBP????



    I asked your parents. They said your MBP is in the basement next to your nightstand alongside the worn out Victoria Secrets Christmas season catalogs and the 1/2-full jar of baby oil.



    Now g.o. a.w.a.y...
  • Reply 103 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Garion View Post


    I would argue that Apple has a proven trackrecord, not of redefining mature markets, but immature markets.



    When Steve Jobs returned to Apple and took over the reins in 1997 he immediately got the company working on the iMac, which turned out to be a huge succes at its debut in 1998. And ever since Apple has been doing everything right with their computer product lines (save for a G4 Cube and possibly the Air), and yet Apple's computers haven't redefined the PC market in any meaningful sense of the word. In a decade they've gained a 5% increase in marketshare, yes, but redefined the market? No. The PC market was a mature market in 1997.



    Where Apple has excelled is in the immature markets. MP3 players were on the market in 2001, but they were not a big item consumer electronics. They weren't a mainstream market article. The iPod changed that. Apple did redefine the market for MP3 players.



    Same with smartphones in 2007. Yes, they had been around for a long time, but they were a niche product for tech geeks, and travelling business people. The iPhone changed that, and set off a landslide of consumer smartphones "for the rest of us" in the following years. Apple did redefine the smartphone market.



    And now Apple is about to do it all over again. This time with another product category that has been around for almost a decade but still hasn't matured into a mass market consumer product: the tablet computer. The iPad. And this is where Apple shines. Take an immature market with a product category that has so far been halfassed and badly done, and make it right!



    When they do that, they have proven that they can indeed redefine markets. But not in mature markets, only in immature markets.



    Amen. Nuff said.
  • Reply 104 of 136
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    So...... Gene Munster is in charge of product development at Apple now?
  • Reply 105 of 136
    tofinotofino Posts: 697member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eastman View Post




    Am sorry but they must be smoking something ..



    Here in Germany you can buy a great HDTV for under 1000 Euros ..

    And the Apple TV ain't selling much at all already ..



    On top they think people will pay what ? 60-90 a Month for a TV Service ? Where do they live ?

    Not here thats for sure ..

    Here Customers expect DSL / Landline Fone Service with a Landline to Landline Flatrate and TV for something that costs 60 or more ..



    I Pay 60 EUROS for a 50MB Down 10Up stream DSL Line with a Landline and flat with a Tivo like Tv Receiver 60 Channels and Free Films / TV Shows plus Rental Film and Films ..

    (T-Home Entertain)



    You think i Pay another for a TV and subscription on top of this ? NEVER ..

    BTW .. i am NO Apple Hater far from it i looooveee Apple .. ]





    that was my first thought - while this 'analyst' is looking at US numbers, apple is likely looking at 'world' products. the economics of north american tv land probably don't translate well to europe, where the cable companies don't have the kind of strangle hold over viewers like they have on this side of the pond.
  • Reply 106 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    It's a slight possibility, but the chances of this happening are razor thin.



    Apple uses content to drive sales of its high-margin hardware. It is far more likely for Apple to sell a set-top box (like AppleTV), rather than license the software (we all know how keen Apple is to do the latter), which is a completely different business model.



    As pointed out earlier, the buying cycle for TVs is considerably longer than computers or small consumer electronics.



    The hardware-software integration in Apple products is very tight. They would essentially give that up if they licensed AppleTV OS. What happens if a hardware partner specs out a underpowered TV that provides a lousy user experience of the Apple-branded AppleTV service or ships a confounding remote (like Sony's)? That makes Apple look bad.



    Giving up tight control doesn't sound particularly Apple-like.



    I wasn't suggesting that Apple would license the software and let Sony, Samsung et al. come up with their own hardware specs. Of course they wouldn't allow that. If they ever decide to partner I believe they would require hardware that is identical to the standalone Apple TV.



    As for navigation, most remotes have blu-ray navigation buttons that would duplicate the functions of the Apple remote quite effectively. All you need to add is a button that says "ATV". Those who prefer to use the Apple remote, iPhone, iPod or iPad would still be able to do so.
  • Reply 107 of 136
    ifailifail Posts: 463member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post


    Apple could build the most elegant box doing 1080p without a sweat outputting 1080p + user selectable audio over HDMI with auto-detection hand-free recalibration of poorly calibrated TVs but what would the point of it be?!?! The movie industry (movie/tv/etc) refuses to offer Apple anything even remotely close to their full catalog (even 1/2 their catalog) and the crumbs they do offer is dumbed down to 720p...



    The STUDIOS do not YET want DIGITAL DELIVERY to become the NORM...



    to the public.



    I could continue but lets face it ... lots of money and pride was put on the line with this last fight! Now the winner is crowned. Everyone kissed and made-up but __NOW__ we have that guy Steve guy from Apple banging on our door. The ideas are good with some really interesting HOWEVER ... do we actually consider supporting the ideas with our full catalogs AND at full resolutions?!?! Now, if were do, does ANYONE know what would happen to the 'still battered & bruised' BR format that we've all sunk boat loads of cash into?



    Yea... I'm gonna side with 'hold the guy off for as LONG as humanly possible so BR can pay us back" strategy ... We had to waste far to much $$$ making BR a success to let if fair by other markets...



    I really think THAT (above) is the MAIN sticking point preventing studios from doing any REAL business with Apple.



    That's a problem Apple still can't solve, I get quite a selection of 1080p movies on my 360 for purchase/rent so i find it amusing Apple has as of yet not been able to do the same. I'm sure Apple can easily get 1080p content if they set prices higher for movies or lowered revenue sharing but the movie industry is making sure it isn't manhandled the same way the music industry was.



    The industry sticking with Blu-Ray/DVD is simple, more money to be had like you said. They don't want their movies/shows bought or rented for a dollar (I believe Warner Bros has a 3-4 month delay deal from when a new DVD ships to when it can be on Netflix, the same is happening to RedBox as well)



    Movie studios will hold out as long as possible from bring their content online if they can't get the prices they want because online distribution does not make the majority of the revenue, physical sales do.
  • Reply 108 of 136
    I think Apple is on to something, however as the business involves an increasing amount of puchasable content I notice that Apple is again limiting itself from the rest of the world. Besides music and apps I can hardly purchase any content here in Europe. This is also what concerns me with the iPad, because it depends on content. Anybody share my concern?
  • Reply 109 of 136
    gumbygogumbygo Posts: 10member
    This whole idea of getting all your video via the internet and dropping your cable TV is flawed.



    I have Comcast, and I learned the hard way that Comcast throttles your internet speed down when you cancel your TV service. I called out the Comcast technicians because I was getting anemic speeds (<3mbps). They looked at my setup and immediately said that I needed to re-instated my TV service to remove the speed cap. After signing up for basic cable ($20/mo), my internet speed jumped from 3mbps to 20mbps.



    They informed me that their policy is that internet-only customers always get crippled internet service. Only customers with a bundled TV service get the full data rates. So if you cancel your TV service, expect your internet to be so slow that you can't stream all that video you planned on streaming!



    I think Comcast does this to protect their TV business from exactly the sort of thing this article is about.
  • Reply 110 of 136
    encroencro Posts: 4member
    even though Gene Munster is for some unexplainable reason quoted often on Apple Insider, his predictions have NEVER been accurate.



    It's very important to note the guy just makes it all up as an analyst and is not based on insider knowledge. I don't understand why the rumour sites even bother to pay attention.
  • Reply 111 of 136
    rob55rob55 Posts: 1,291member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ifail View Post


    ...I'm sure Apple can easily get 1080p content if they set prices higher for movies or lowered revenue sharing but the movie industry is making sure it isn't manhandled the same way the music industry was.



    Set higher prices? Are you kidding? As it is, the price of a new release HD movie is too high. For example, the iTunes store is selling the 720p HD version of "New Moon" for $20. Now why would I buy that when I could get it on Blu-ray for the same price but at 1080p and high res audio to boot.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ifail View Post


    ...(I believe Warner Bros has a 3-4 month delay deal from when a new DVD ships to when it can be on Netflix, the same is happening to RedBox as well)



    I didn't believe this at first and looked into it. Boy was I surprised to find that it's true. Even though "The Blind Side" just got released on DVD and Blu-ray, it won't be available on Netflix until 4/20 (almost a 1 month delay). Wow.
  • Reply 112 of 136
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    they need the content people to go along with it, and the content people are afraid of alienating the cable companies. It's just hard to see how to get from here to there.



    That is why they aren't predicted to introduce one this year. Time is what you need to overcome those obstacles. Hopefully the iPad will make content providers more interested in iTunes as a distribution platform, and growing online services will lead them to wanting a proven source of revenue in the online world allowing Apple to make the deals needed to bring this forward.
  • Reply 113 of 136
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by encro View Post


    even though Gene Munster is for some unexplainable reason quoted often on Apple Insider, his predictions have NEVER been accurate.



    It's very important to note the guy just makes it all up as an analyst and is not based on insider knowledge. I don't understand why the rumour sites even bother to pay attention.



    Actually not so. If you look it up, you'll find that he had a good handle on the the direction Apple was going to take with tablet computers, months before the iPad appeared.



    I think he's right to suggest that Apple has a huge opportunity in this market. That's all he's done, really. The problem we're seeing here is that some seem to want to take his broad generalities and spin them into specific products.
  • Reply 114 of 136
    Haven't read all the comments and I am sure others have already said these points, but here I go:



    1_ The price points are ridiculous you can find a good 40" tv for well under $1000. I just bought a 47" 240hz for $999, so whoever wrote this is incredibly wrong.



    2_ Also, to say t will not launch for 2-4 years then give those price points is idiotic. Prices drop quickly, so in 2-4 years a basic 40" LCD will be under $500 if not less, because with LED tvs emerging and soon OLED tvs no one will want a strictly LCD only tv anymore, not even counting the evolving 3D tv technology. It's foolish to say what a tv will cost in 2-4 yrs and what technology they will have and what type of tv Apple will launch.



    3_ I (only speaking for me) would never buy an Apple tv that mainly works via iTunes reason being I (me) need ESPN, NFL Network, the NFL Redzone Channel, and TMC among others and right now iTunes doesn't offer those and a lot of basic cable programs. I don't want only iTunes programs. Now, maybe I am wrong and this tv would have ALL the normal calbe channels and offer iTunes to serve as your HBO or Showtime channels substitutes. In that realm I can understand and would consider it. Guess I just would need more info on how it works and what's offered.



    In any event I am looking forward to getting more info and this possibly pushing the tech of it all.





    :later.
  • Reply 115 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    they need the content people to go along with it, and the content people are afraid of alienating the cable companies. It's just hard to see how to get from here to there.



    Seems pretty simple to me. After the iPad is released, the people that buy it will start to gobble down more video content through the iTunes store. That will convince Movie studios and TV studios to offer more content through iTunes. Apple is apparently working on a way to offer advertising within their video streams which would allow an Apple based TV subscription system and could convince the TV studios to start to abandon the Cable companies. People with iPhones, wifi connected iPods and internet connected computers running iTunes would also be able to tap into this ecosystem creating a Halo effect. The living room TV would be a natural extension of this especially if Standard websurfing and perhaps Apple TV based games become part of the ecosystem.
  • Reply 116 of 136
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Munster didn't really specify any price points nor did he specify any product features. His analysis was only to suggest that Apple has an opportunity in this market over the next few years which he believes they are in the position to exploit. All of the other details have been invented.
  • Reply 117 of 136
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Munster didn't really specify any price points nor did he specify any product features. His analysis was only to suggest that Apple has an opportunity in this market over the next few years which he believes they are in the position to exploit. All of the other details have been invented.



    Interesting. Journalistic integrity and respect comes from having it. If you don't have it or apply it you'll never be given it.
  • Reply 118 of 136
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Interesting. Journalistic integrity and respect comes from having it. If you don't have it or apply it you'll never be given it.



    In fairness, they've mainly been invented by posters to this thread. The concept Munster brings up is interesting, and has merit -- but the drift of the thread has been almost entirely towards tech specifics and price, none of which could possibly be settled yet. Not enough about the forest, too much about the trees.
  • Reply 119 of 136
    cmf2cmf2 Posts: 1,427member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post


    3_ I (only speaking for me) would never buy an Apple tv that mainly works via iTunes reason being I (me) need ESPN, NFL Network, the NFL Redzone Channel, and TMC among others and right now iTunes doesn't offer those and a lot of basic cable programs. I don't want only iTunes programs. Now, maybe I am wrong and this tv would have ALL the normal calbe channels and offer iTunes to serve as your HBO or Showtime channels substitutes. In that realm I can understand and would consider it. Guess I just would need more info on how it works and what's offered.



    If Apple just wanted to provide you with what iTunes offers now, why would they need to negotiate new deals?
  • Reply 120 of 136
    cory bauercory bauer Posts: 1,286member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    I think he's right to suggest that Apple has a huge opportunity in this market. That's all he's done, really. The problem we're seeing here is that some seem to want to take his broad generalities and spin them into specific products.



    Apple would do about as well in the HDTV market as they did in the home stereo market; remember the iPod Hifi?



    Yes, the home theater market is a mess and there is some major room for simplification. There is some severe incompetence on the part of the CE manufacturers that fuels consumer confusion; blu-ray players come bundled not with HDMI cables, but RCA cables. Audio receivers have fourteen-hundred different pointless options and effects settings. Televisions come out of the box with the most terrible picture settings possible. But Apple's solution that Munster outlined in this article doesn't solve any of the issues; instead, it would take everything away and replace it with an overpriced LCD that only allows you to watch content supplied by Apple and games built for iPhones. That doesn't do anyone any good, except Apple.
Sign In or Register to comment.