Partnering with Sony, Logitec, and ESPECIALLY Dish Network are huge moves for Google. Soon all Dish Network customers will have to option to get a DVR with Google TV built in. Apple should have partnered with ATT's Uverse and did the same. Google's exposure will be similar to how Android has evolved into the market that it is today.
You mean a second rate experience plagued by fragmentation that doesn't generate any profit for Google?
They wouldn't...because they are nice to their Apple Pimps so that the Great Apple Pimp gives them nice stuff to spend their wages on. You are sucked into the great Apple Vortex of Solitude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Have you heard the AppleTV is a build out of one's already growing ecosystem? Why in the hell would I want to spend $300 as an Apple customer if I'm already used to having my Mac, iPod Touch, iPhone, and more?
Not when Google TV is installed into your Dish Network DVR it won't, which is just one of the major players in GTV. Then it's just part of the Cable Ecosystem then. Like the TVGuide Channel Guide is integrated into just about every basic cable box.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou
Imo the logitech google tv is a geek toy. Too complex for average users
Now everyone who keeps praising Apple for totally "re-inventing" the way we live our digital lives are totally ripping on a competitor (Google/Logitech/Dish Network and others) that's doing exactly what Apple always does, but got to it first this time. What a bunch of hypocrites we have on these forums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF
Google TV/Revue are competitors, but at the same time they are not. There is a fundamental difference in the approach taken by Google/Logitech and Apple.
Apple: Apple TV is an add-on to your existing home theatre. It brings additional content and/or viewing options. The add-on concept is familiar to consumers as they are used to adding bluray players, game boxes, etc.
Google TV/Logitech Revue: Complete restructuring of your home theatre. Rather than being an add-on, it is trying to be the new heart of your system. It will require users to completely rewire/setup their systems and get used to a new way of doing things. The TV or receiver is no longer the center of the system. This is a radical concept that consumers won't be used to. How can something that isn't a receiver/tuner/tv be the heart of the system?
Apple's approach has far broader appeal both because of price and the ability of an average consumer to understand what it is/does. They are taking a seed/harvest approach. Apple TV has basic functionality now, but AirPlay, apps and additional content providers will make it into a super powerful device. Integration with the Apple ecosystem takes it even further. And then they'll take all that functionality and cram it into their own TV and take the market by storm.
I think it really comes down to one thing. Can you explain what these products do to an average consumer in one or two sentences? If not, you've lost them. I think this is where Google's strategy will hinder its success. Its just too complicated for consumers to understand why they need it or how they would use it.
Coming? When? People keep saying Apps are coming but when? And how will the UI work?Yes, and DishNet is going to provide the Boxes for Google TV now too. So I'd say the Average Dish customer, which there are many more than ATV owners now, will probably opt for GTV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF
Flash: Already proven irrelevant by the success of the iOS platform.
Apps: Coming to Apple TV and part of a much larger and better app platform
DVR: Provided by cable and dish companies already. Not sure that google tv is adding anything here.
Google makes more off Adverts and the pimping of user Data and doesn't really need to concern themselves with Hardware. Since they have open source, they can start small and let the community take over. Google's not afraid to throw out a bunch of ideas and see what sticks. Look at Chrome OS, didn't really catch on. Was a great idea and they marketed it well to the devs. But Android is the mainstream for Google and it's carriers now, so Chrome OS is kind of mute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF
You mean a second rate experience plagued by fragmentation that doesn't generate any profit for Google?
I'll believe it when Apple announces it. So far EVERYONE has mis-judged when and how Apple will produce products. The only way people have been able to predict anything Apple does is through leaks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNSF
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
And don't forget that if Apple doesn't supply the app store, it probably won't be long at all before the jailbreak community has thier own up and running. Afterall, the Apple TV is already jailbroken, only thing really needed now is a launcher. I doubt it will take them months to get/create one. Since there are only a couple of BIG apps that are missing from the apple TV, jailbraking will be a very viable option to add that missing functionality.
I would say the biggest missing app would be HULU. Of course there are a number of others that would be allot of fun and nice to have as well. But my bets are that the community adds support for hulu via jailbreak before apple's official app store is launched for the Apple TV. (Still assuming one is coming, which I do believe it will in time)
I would say the biggest missing app would be HULU. Of course there are a number of others that would be allot of fun and nice to have as well. But my bets are that the community adds support for hulu via jailbreak before apple's official app store is launched for the Apple TV. (Still assuming one is coming, which I do believe it will in time)
Oh absolutely, Apple is going to introduce a TV. I'm convinced that is what they are saving the iTV name for. Q3 2011 is my guess.
Oh absolutely, Apple is going to introduce a TV. I'm convinced that is what they are saving the iTV name for. Q3 2011 is my guess.
Which TV will Apple make?
What display tech would they use to satisfy all potential customers
What size(s) satisfy all potential customers?
How many sizes will they offer?
Will they offer smaller units to fit bedrooms and whatnot?
Is Apple going to become a TV display manufacturer like the major TV makers are?
How will they get past the customer?s focus on size for a particular space that is prevalent in this industry and not an issue with PCs and PMPs?
How are they going to get past the low profit margins of the TV industry?
Will these be offered in their stores which already tend to be packed with people buying items that make Apple a lot more profit per volume and weight than a TV ever could?
Why would Apple make a TV that will be hard to impossible to profit from when they could partner with current TV makers to allow a virtually infinite number of TV configurations to be used with an AppleTV that attaches to the back of these special TVs thus allowing Apple to keep doing what it does best, allows the TV markers to do what they do best, all while keeping costs to a minimal and allowing for more grow of the AppleTV?
I sense a little doubt But I'll bite and tell you want I think...
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Which TV will Apple make? Not sure what you mean.
What display tech would they use to satisfy all potential customer? Its not necessary to satisfy all customers. In keeping with Apple products they probably wouldn't even reveal all the details. It just has to look good. Who cares about the rest.
What size(s) satisfy all potential customers? No need to satisfy all customers, just enough customers.
How many sizes will they offer? Long term only three to four sizes are needed to hit enough of the market. Super small and super large are probably not on the radar.
Will they offer smaller units to fit bedrooms and whatnot? What is considered small? They don't even offer an iMac under 20 inches with the 27 inch being the most popular. Something like 27, 32, 40 and 46 would cover the bulk of the market.
Is Apple going to become a TV display manufacturer like the major TV makers are? No, not necessary. They might innovate and develop technologies with their partners, but they won't become a manufacturer. Look at the model they use with their computers, iphone and ipad. Apple doesn't directly make those devices. They design them, they work with their partners and suppliers, but ultimately someone else makes them.
How will they get past the customer’s focus on size for a particular space that is prevalent in this industry and not an issue with PCs and PMPs? Again they don't need to be everything to everyone. Offer a decent selection of sizes and consumers will make a decision that is best for them.
How are they going to get past the low profit margins of the TV industry? Look at the cell phone industry. Not exactly high margins there... until the iPhone. Now Apple owns the largest share of profit margin in the phone industry with one of the lowest overall marketshares. Apple is genius at finding ways to drive costs down and still justify a premium price.
Will these be offered in their stores which already tend to be packed with people buying items that make Apple a lot more profit per volume and weight than a TV ever could? I haven't quite figured this one out yet. You're right that Apple stores are not built to house such large inventories. They might be able to put displays in store and then to overnight deliveries from central locations. I'm not sure about this, but at the same time there are many people who would be happy ordering the TV from apple.com and having it delivered.
Why would Apple make a TV that will be hard to impossible to profit from when they could partner with current TV makers to allow a virtually infinite number of TV configurations to be used with an AppleTV that attaches to the back of these special TVs thus allowing Apple to keep doing what it does best, allows the TV markers to do what they do best, all while keeping costs to a minimal and allowing for more grow of the AppleTV? Take a look at every other market Apple is in. How is this any different? ipods, iphones, ipads, computers... everything. Apple makes the software and the hardware and has been incredibly successful in each instance. OEM manufacturers don't value to Apple's model. However, I don't think Apple would discontinue selling the standalone Apple TV box either.
If Apple wants to introduce a TV they don't need to satisfy every consumer. They don't need to be everything to everyone. They just need to identify the core they want to pursue and go after it. Just like they've done with the iPhone and iPad. They're not right for everyone, but millions upon millions are still buying them and Apple is making billions and billions in profits. More than any other company in those same markets.
There are no technical barriers to Apple producing a TV either. They can engineer circles around any other consumer electronics company in the market. Open an iPhone and then open any other smartphone on the market and you'll see what I mean. iPhone makes all other phones look like they were designed by preschoolers. The only barrier to Apple making a TV is whether they think it fits into their strategy and the evolution of their ecosystem.
Maybe think of it this way. Google TV is to TVs what Android is to smartphones. Google is making software and getting OEMs to load it on their TVs. In this case, an Apple television is to TV, what the iPhone is to phones. Apple's tried and true strategy will be to make the software and the hardware. And I don't think the current Apple TV box is hardware they have their sights on. I think its a stepping stone.
There are no technical barriers to Apple producing a TV either. They can engineer circles around any other consumer electronics company in the market.
How are they going to "engineer circles" around the current producers of TVs? There are only a few producers of the panels, and a TV doesn't do much, it has a bunch of inputs, and it displays stuff via those inputs, what extra can they do? Except adding $1000 to the cost by intergrating the AppleTV device?
I'm surprised Google didn't learn from Apple's free market research. $250+ is just too expensive for a standalone IPTV box. The TV integrated stuff has a better chance just because consumers won't know exactly how much extra they're paying for it. The TV will be more expensive but they will attribute that to it being a "better" model than the non-GoogleTV device next to it. I'm just not convinced people want an updated WebTV experience. Not convinced they want the scaled back $99 Apple TV experience either but it's probably a bit closer to expectations
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
People on here are crapping on the concept that Logitech is selling an OPTIONAL smaller controller for $129 for the $299 Revue. And yet you thing it's okay for Apple to require an additional purchase that is at least $199 (I'm guessing the iPhone 4 will be the only fully supported device since it's the only one with all the latest motion sensitive hardware) to actually fully use a $99 device they've bought.
--------
Here's an idea for everyone. How about you wait until a GoogleTV device is actually released before you rip it to shreds with criticism?
You may not want to, but to a potential customer without all of those "sunk costs" Logitech's product may look like the perfect solution.
It sounds like the other poster allowed himself to become locked in.
The Logitech box will do everything that his current panoply of devices will do, and more.
"Without better search technology, it's not immediately clear whether Apple can transform Apple TV from a living room add-on to a living room nexus. What's more, the company's power as the gatekeeper of iTunes may have made potential partners wary.
Apple TV does have one significant advantage over the early round of Google TV products: price."
The same article says that Sony will announce a new series of TV sets with Google TV built in. Next week.
It sounds like Google had all these partnerships lined up, and has sandbagged Apple. My understanding is that Apple can't get the content partnerships it needs to make the iTV a viable product. Apple TV is unlikely to make any permanent inroads in this market, given Google's better solution.
Comments
1. Full internet browser with FLASH
2. Apps
3. DVR
I'd say that's worth the extra cash. Maybe not $199 more than ATV but certainly more than $99.
Some might say "They're doing it wrong!" and $129.99 for a mini controller? seriously?
Partnering with Sony, Logitec, and ESPECIALLY Dish Network are huge moves for Google. Soon all Dish Network customers will have to option to get a DVR with Google TV built in. Apple should have partnered with ATT's Uverse and did the same. Google's exposure will be similar to how Android has evolved into the market that it is today.
You mean a second rate experience plagued by fragmentation that doesn't generate any profit for Google?
And what do you get for that, that's better than ATV???
1. Full internet browser with FLASH
2. Apps
3. DVR
I'd say that's worth the extra cash. Maybe not $199 more than ATV but certainly more than $99.
Flash: Already proven irrelevant by the success of the iOS platform.
Apps: Coming to Apple TV and part of a much larger and better app platform
DVR: Provided by cable and dish companies already. Not sure that google tv is adding anything here.
Bet Apple will make more money off their box than Google.
Have you heard the AppleTV is a build out of one's already growing ecosystem? Why in the hell would I want to spend $300 as an Apple customer if I'm already used to having my Mac, iPod Touch, iPhone, and more?
Imo the logitech google tv is a geek toy. Too complex for average users
Now everyone who keeps praising Apple for totally "re-inventing" the way we live our digital lives are totally ripping on a competitor (Google/Logitech/Dish Network and others) that's doing exactly what Apple always does, but got to it first this time. What a bunch of hypocrites we have on these forums.
Google TV/Revue are competitors, but at the same time they are not. There is a fundamental difference in the approach taken by Google/Logitech and Apple.
Apple: Apple TV is an add-on to your existing home theatre. It brings additional content and/or viewing options. The add-on concept is familiar to consumers as they are used to adding bluray players, game boxes, etc.
Google TV/Logitech Revue: Complete restructuring of your home theatre. Rather than being an add-on, it is trying to be the new heart of your system. It will require users to completely rewire/setup their systems and get used to a new way of doing things. The TV or receiver is no longer the center of the system. This is a radical concept that consumers won't be used to. How can something that isn't a receiver/tuner/tv be the heart of the system?
Apple's approach has far broader appeal both because of price and the ability of an average consumer to understand what it is/does. They are taking a seed/harvest approach. Apple TV has basic functionality now, but AirPlay, apps and additional content providers will make it into a super powerful device. Integration with the Apple ecosystem takes it even further. And then they'll take all that functionality and cram it into their own TV and take the market by storm.
I think it really comes down to one thing. Can you explain what these products do to an average consumer in one or two sentences? If not, you've lost them. I think this is where Google's strategy will hinder its success. Its just too complicated for consumers to understand why they need it or how they would use it.
Flash: Already proven irrelevant by the success of the iOS platform.
Apps: Coming to Apple TV and part of a much larger and better app platform
DVR: Provided by cable and dish companies already. Not sure that google tv is adding anything here.
You mean a second rate experience plagued by fragmentation that doesn't generate any profit for Google?
Coming? When? People keep saying Apps are coming but when? And how will the UI work?
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
And don't forget that if Apple doesn't supply the app store, it probably won't be long at all before the jailbreak community has thier own up and running. Afterall, the Apple TV is already jailbroken, only thing really needed now is a launcher. I doubt it will take them months to get/create one. Since there are only a couple of BIG apps that are missing from the apple TV, jailbraking will be a very viable option to add that missing functionality.
I would say the biggest missing app would be HULU. Of course there are a number of others that would be allot of fun and nice to have as well. But my bets are that the community adds support for hulu via jailbreak before apple's official app store is launched for the Apple TV. (Still assuming one is coming, which I do believe it will in time)
I would say the biggest missing app would be HULU. Of course there are a number of others that would be allot of fun and nice to have as well. But my bets are that the community adds support for hulu via jailbreak before apple's official app store is launched for the Apple TV. (Still assuming one is coming, which I do believe it will in time)
Oh absolutely, Apple is going to introduce a TV. I'm convinced that is what they are saving the iTV name for. Q3 2011 is my guess.
Oh absolutely, Apple is going to introduce a TV. I'm convinced that is what they are saving the iTV name for. Q3 2011 is my guess.
If Apple wants to introduce a TV they don't need to satisfy every consumer. They don't need to be everything to everyone. They just need to identify the core they want to pursue and go after it. Just like they've done with the iPhone and iPad. They're not right for everyone, but millions upon millions are still buying them and Apple is making billions and billions in profits. More than any other company in those same markets.
There are no technical barriers to Apple producing a TV either. They can engineer circles around any other consumer electronics company in the market. Open an iPhone and then open any other smartphone on the market and you'll see what I mean. iPhone makes all other phones look like they were designed by preschoolers. The only barrier to Apple making a TV is whether they think it fits into their strategy and the evolution of their ecosystem.
Maybe think of it this way. Google TV is to TVs what Android is to smartphones. Google is making software and getting OEMs to load it on their TVs. In this case, an Apple television is to TV, what the iPhone is to phones. Apple's tried and true strategy will be to make the software and the hardware. And I don't think the current Apple TV box is hardware they have their sights on. I think its a stepping stone.
If Apple wants to introduce a TV they don't need to satisfy every consumer. They don't need to be everything to everyone...blah, blah, blah
There are no technical barriers to Apple producing a TV either. They can engineer circles around any other consumer electronics company in the market.
How are they going to "engineer circles" around the current producers of TVs? There are only a few producers of the panels, and a TV doesn't do much, it has a bunch of inputs, and it displays stuff via those inputs, what extra can they do? Except adding $1000 to the cost by intergrating the AppleTV device?
Timing of course is unknown, but i put my money on q1 2011. The pieces are coming together...
The hardware of course is out now.
The updated remote app for iphone and ipad is out and ready to be the interface.
Next iPad and iphone models will be finalized by q1 so that issues of screen size, resolution, scaling etc can be addressed.
New iOS SDK could support app development for all devices and screens and we would expect this SDK to be available in q1 based on historical releases.
If it was going to happen in q4 2010 they would have mentioned it already.
Of course this is just an educated guess, but I think q1 feels about right.
People on here are crapping on the concept that Logitech is selling an OPTIONAL smaller controller for $129 for the $299 Revue. And yet you thing it's okay for Apple to require an additional purchase that is at least $199 (I'm guessing the iPhone 4 will be the only fully supported device since it's the only one with all the latest motion sensitive hardware) to actually fully use a $99 device they've bought.
--------
Here's an idea for everyone. How about you wait until a GoogleTV device is actually released before you rip it to shreds with criticism?
You may not want to, but to a potential customer without all of those "sunk costs" Logitech's product may look like the perfect solution.
It sounds like the other poster allowed himself to become locked in.
The Logitech box will do everything that his current panoply of devices will do, and more.
"Without better search technology, it's not immediately clear whether Apple can transform Apple TV from a living room add-on to a living room nexus. What's more, the company's power as the gatekeeper of iTunes may have made potential partners wary.
Apple TV does have one significant advantage over the early round of Google TV products: price."
The same article says that Sony will announce a new series of TV sets with Google TV built in. Next week.
It sounds like Google had all these partnerships lined up, and has sandbagged Apple. My understanding is that Apple can't get the content partnerships it needs to make the iTV a viable product. Apple TV is unlikely to make any permanent inroads in this market, given Google's better solution.