i don't know anything about Munster. but an Apple HDTV with AppleTV built in makes plenty of sense. the HDTV is the ultimate home digital appliance and a logical part of any media ecosystem. Sony and the rest are trying to do the same thing, but they keep screwing it up by making it all too complicated and focused on their own flawed package of web services, or Google TV. and they don't offer all the pieces.
only Apple can, with its seamless iTunes/iOS ecosystem. the iPad with AirPlay makes a better remote control to use on the sofa (for things more complicated than changing channels) than any of the cumbersome hardware from Logitech and the rest. it is much easier to navigate the web on your handheld iPad sitting on the sofa than on a TV screen, and then beam the specific web media you want to the TV. and there will be apps to display too, one way or another.
it is not like Apple would be starting from scratch. Apple already makes a very good (overpriced) 27" computer monitor. add good speakers, a tuner or cablecard, AppleTV, and necessary ports and you quickly have a great product. it could be released this Fall, with bigger screens coming next year.
why would Apple do it? Besides protecting its established iOS/iTunes market, because the profit potential is so huge. At best Apple is making $20-$30 profit on each AppleTV. even if it sold 10 million, that would just be $1 billion in sales and maybe $300 million in profit. which is peanuts for Apple.
but 10 million sales of a $1500 TV would total $15 billion, and profit of $2-$3 billion. now that is real money.
Gee whiz guys, seriously ... it's moronic for anyone to say "Apple shouldn't or Apple has no reason to ..." etc. We've heard this all before and what happened?
remember when Apple had no good reason to sell an MP3 player?
remember when Apple had no good reason to sell a tablet computer?
think of a television running iOS with App Store/iTunes built-in and the ability to purcahse/download all types of media on a big ass screen ... you don't think that wouldn't be the next big thing on everybody's Christmas list?
Apple TV right now is still a "hobby" according to Jobs. But think what that might look like if Apple turned it's hobby into a real business. It ain't that hard to imagine really, just start connecting the dots.
You should trademark that name before Apple does, big ass screen or they will be using by next christmas!
BTW: I agree with everything you said except the "moronic" part.
Tv should be one of many things you can do with a big living room screen, if present at all (broadcasting is such a needlessly serial and outdated way to spread content, but ok - everyone seems to keep wanting it).
It's funny how people react to the idea of Apple making a big screen device for the living room just the way they did when they heard about iPads, and iPods.
There is noway Apple would make television sets. Why would they want to jeopardize the image they have as a solid phone,Mac and music leader? If they have a bunch of people buy sets that suck compared to the leading TV makers, they will only pull down their whole image. Not a wise investment for Apple. Apple should invest in making the Itunes program part TV set like Netflix.
Plus, I am sure Apple will roll out apps for the Apple TV this year.
There is noway Apple would make television sets. Why would they want to jeopardize the image they have as a solid phone,Mac and music leader? If they have a bunch of people buy sets that suck compared to the leading TV makers, they will only pull down their whole image. Not a wise investment for Apple. Apple should invest in making the Itunes program part TV set like Netflix.
Plus, I am sure Apple will roll out apps for the Apple TV this year.
Could be right. Apple did get out of the Printer business and camera business for the very reasons you site.
But I for one would like very much to simplify my home electronics. Get the largest, thinnest best picture Apple made TV with AppleTV built in. I hate components with their attendant cables, etc.
An iMac with the largest screen, currently 27", and the thinnest, lightest, smallest laptop, 11" MBA.
An iPhone 5 and the iPad 2 and I'm good to go. I could even see forgoing the iMac.
PS. Apple did remove the word "computer" from their corporate name...I think they want to be known as a superior consumer electronics company..which indeed they are.
Interesting, but no way in a million years is anyone going to pay "$50-$90" a month for an iTunes pass. Even if the iTunes pass could replace all other sources for the consumer, it wouldn't be worth that and in reality, one is still going to need the blu-ray player, and most of the other sources and the gear to support them.
Any "replace your current setup" solutions from Apple will pretty much have to replace *everything* and also be cheaper than any one individual component that's currently in use to catch on.
Apple has a TV. Its called Apple TV. Why would Apple enter an industry where prcies fall 30% a year and no one has pricing power...
Also remember that the TV industry (e.g. monitors) is in terrible shape right now because the 'pig in the python' of flat screen conversion has largely completed. Thats the reason for the big push to convince people they need 3D TVs... to kick start TV sales.
Apple would be insane to get into that space consuming, low margin, support intensive business.
Prediction: 3.9B will go to glassless 3d screens for next gen iPhones, iPods, and maybe iPads.
3D is a fad that you will be embarrassed to have supported a few years from now when it disappears again.
I'm old enough to remember the last time 3D was supposed to be in everyone's TV "next year" and major motion pictures were being released using the technology. I'm also old enough to remember being told about the time before that (when it was used for major motion picture releases and supposed to be on your TV "next year"), by my Mother.
Both times it never happened because it's basically just a tired old gimmick. It doesn't work because you need to wear glasses and the glasses give people a headache for various technical reasons I won't get into. 3D is basically a glasses (or some kind of headgear) based tech.
When the technology is finally completely contained within the glasses, it might catch on, but then everyone will look like Geordie Laforge, so there's that to consider.
Interesting, but no way in a million years is anyone going to pay "$50-$90" a month for an iTunes pass. Even if the iTunes pass could replace all other sources for the consumer, it wouldn't be worth that and in reality, one is still going to need the blu-ray player, and most of the other sources and the gear to support them.
Any "replace your current setup" solutions from Apple will pretty much have to replace *everything* and also be cheaper than any one individual component that's currently in use to catch on.
And Apple has made it clear that they're not going to do most of those components on the stack.
But seriously, does Munster have any idea what the warehousing and showroom space would be to support the entire range of monitor sizes that people want, ranging from 20" to 100"?
as to apps, to realize its potential, AppleTV already needs a new third class of iOS apps @ 16:9 aspect 1280x720. iPad apps are 4:3, iPhone apps are 3:2. i expect to see this coming this year no matter what. it will give AppleTV sales a big boost.
All of you are blinded by your hatred for Munster. I too think he is usually full of it. However, I think he is correct on this one. In fact, I think the signs have been there for a long time and Piper Jaffrey are just jumping on the bandwagon to try to claim some credit for predicting it.
Apple's deal with LG and the progression of the AppleTV lead me to believe an actual TV is only a matter of time. One of the major issues I have always had with the AppleTV is that it requires you to change inputs on your TV and then use a different GUI than your normal tv viewing. If that were integrated with a nice new Apple GUI, it would make perfect sense. It would no longer be a "hobby".
I think Apple would like nothing more than to have an Apple logo at the bottom of the screen with every one in the family staring at it all day long...they could even have a momentary flash of the Apple logo at start up when you switch your TV on.
It would be rather like Apple making garage door openers where when you came home a big bright blue Apple logo appeared on your garage door as it was opening....Hmmmm!
TV: No wires, simplified remote, no components and an Apple UI. When can I pre-order?
If you don't think that Apple could be looking at televisions, you are extremely shortsighted. An end user experience of having all home devices connected and streaming information has been a goal of many manufacturers (Samsung, Sony, etc.), but up to this point, has been clunky at best. If I could get a 50" television that had an integrated Apple OS, Apple TV, camera, use my iPod Touch as a remote for everything, and stream music and video without the addition of another device, I'd get it. Maybe even add some touch screen elements as well.
Apple didn't invent the mp3 player, but their designs changed the game. No reason why this would be any different.
If you don't think that Apple could be looking at televisions, you are extremely shortsighted. An end user experience of having all home devices connected and streaming information has been a goal of many manufacturers (Samsung, Sony, etc.), but up to this point, has been clunky at best. If I could get a 50" television that had an integrated Apple OS, Apple TV, camera, use my iPod Touch as a remote for everything, and stream music and video without the addition of another device, I'd get it. Maybe even add some touch screen elements as well.
Apple didn't invent the mp3 player, but their designs changed the game. No reason why this would be any different.
I think Apple would like nothing more than to have an Apple logo at the bottom of the screen with every one in the family staring at it all day long...they could even have a momentary flash of the Apple logo at start up when you switch your TV on.
It would be rather like Apple making garage door openers where when you came home a big bright blue Apple logo appeared on your garage door as it was opening....Hmmmm!
TV: No wires, simplified remote, no components and an Apple UI. When can I pre-order?
Well also think what this might cost. Apple charges 999.00 for their 27" LED monitor. You have to figure something around 50" is going to be close to 3000.00 at least coming from Apple.
Also Apple would have to make it a matte screen or some kind of anti glare which they don't seem to be into these days.
It would be very nice I am sure but doesn't seem to fit into the direction they going in right now when it comes to any of their displays.
Add a 30" this year to the iMac refresh and include an option to add an internal AppleTV. I plan on replacing my original G5 iMac (ordered the day it was announced) with a new one (to be ordered the day the Sandy Bridge is announced) and I would pay for a 30" upgrade, especially if AppleTV is included.
As for the $3.9 Billion, I can see displays as being at the top of the list. I can also see Apple being willing to invest more (up to $10 Billion) for other enhancements, like doubling the size of their new server farm, enhancing protection for other components for their mobile lines (including capital investments capital equipment for producing memory.
What else would Apple potentially need that would benefit from pre-payments.
Comments
only Apple can, with its seamless iTunes/iOS ecosystem. the iPad with AirPlay makes a better remote control to use on the sofa (for things more complicated than changing channels) than any of the cumbersome hardware from Logitech and the rest. it is much easier to navigate the web on your handheld iPad sitting on the sofa than on a TV screen, and then beam the specific web media you want to the TV. and there will be apps to display too, one way or another.
it is not like Apple would be starting from scratch. Apple already makes a very good (overpriced) 27" computer monitor. add good speakers, a tuner or cablecard, AppleTV, and necessary ports and you quickly have a great product. it could be released this Fall, with bigger screens coming next year.
why would Apple do it? Besides protecting its established iOS/iTunes market, because the profit potential is so huge. At best Apple is making $20-$30 profit on each AppleTV. even if it sold 10 million, that would just be $1 billion in sales and maybe $300 million in profit. which is peanuts for Apple.
but 10 million sales of a $1500 TV would total $15 billion, and profit of $2-$3 billion. now that is real money.
Gee whiz guys, seriously ... it's moronic for anyone to say "Apple shouldn't or Apple has no reason to ..." etc. We've heard this all before and what happened?
remember when Apple had no good reason to sell an MP3 player?
remember when Apple had no good reason to sell a tablet computer?
think of a television running iOS with App Store/iTunes built-in and the ability to purcahse/download all types of media on a big ass screen ... you don't think that wouldn't be the next big thing on everybody's Christmas list?
Apple TV right now is still a "hobby" according to Jobs. But think what that might look like if Apple turned it's hobby into a real business. It ain't that hard to imagine really, just start connecting the dots.
You should trademark that name before Apple does, big ass screen or they will be using by next christmas!
BTW: I agree with everything you said except the "moronic" part.
Tv should be one of many things you can do with a big living room screen, if present at all (broadcasting is such a needlessly serial and outdated way to spread content, but ok - everyone seems to keep wanting it).
It's funny how people react to the idea of Apple making a big screen device for the living room just the way they did when they heard about iPads, and iPods.
Plus, I am sure Apple will roll out apps for the Apple TV this year.
There is noway Apple would make television sets. Why would they want to jeopardize the image they have as a solid phone,Mac and music leader? If they have a bunch of people buy sets that suck compared to the leading TV makers, they will only pull down their whole image. Not a wise investment for Apple. Apple should invest in making the Itunes program part TV set like Netflix.
Plus, I am sure Apple will roll out apps for the Apple TV this year.
Could be right. Apple did get out of the Printer business and camera business for the very reasons you site.
But I for one would like very much to simplify my home electronics. Get the largest, thinnest best picture Apple made TV with AppleTV built in. I hate components with their attendant cables, etc.
An iMac with the largest screen, currently 27", and the thinnest, lightest, smallest laptop, 11" MBA.
An iPhone 5 and the iPad 2 and I'm good to go. I could even see forgoing the iMac.
PS. Apple did remove the word "computer" from their corporate name...I think they want to be known as a superior consumer electronics company..which indeed they are.
Interesting, but no way in a million years is anyone going to pay "$50-$90" a month for an iTunes pass. Even if the iTunes pass could replace all other sources for the consumer, it wouldn't be worth that and in reality, one is still going to need the blu-ray player, and most of the other sources and the gear to support them.
Any "replace your current setup" solutions from Apple will pretty much have to replace *everything* and also be cheaper than any one individual component that's currently in use to catch on.
Apple has a TV. Its called Apple TV. Why would Apple enter an industry where prcies fall 30% a year and no one has pricing power...
Also remember that the TV industry (e.g. monitors) is in terrible shape right now because the 'pig in the python' of flat screen conversion has largely completed. Thats the reason for the big push to convince people they need 3D TVs... to kick start TV sales.
Apple would be insane to get into that space consuming, low margin, support intensive business.
Prediction: 3.9B will go to glassless 3d screens for next gen iPhones, iPods, and maybe iPads.
3D is a fad that you will be embarrassed to have supported a few years from now when it disappears again.
I'm old enough to remember the last time 3D was supposed to be in everyone's TV "next year" and major motion pictures were being released using the technology. I'm also old enough to remember being told about the time before that (when it was used for major motion picture releases and supposed to be on your TV "next year"), by my Mother.
Both times it never happened because it's basically just a tired old gimmick. It doesn't work because you need to wear glasses and the glasses give people a headache for various technical reasons I won't get into. 3D is basically a glasses (or some kind of headgear) based tech.
When the technology is finally completely contained within the glasses, it might catch on, but then everyone will look like Geordie Laforge, so there's that to consider.
Interesting, but no way in a million years is anyone going to pay "$50-$90" a month for an iTunes pass. Even if the iTunes pass could replace all other sources for the consumer, it wouldn't be worth that and in reality, one is still going to need the blu-ray player, and most of the other sources and the gear to support them.
Any "replace your current setup" solutions from Apple will pretty much have to replace *everything* and also be cheaper than any one individual component that's currently in use to catch on.
And Apple has made it clear that they're not going to do most of those components on the stack.
But seriously, does Munster have any idea what the warehousing and showroom space would be to support the entire range of monitor sizes that people want, ranging from 20" to 100"?
Nuts doesn't begin to describe the idea.
3D is a fad that you will be embarrassed to have supported a few years from now when it disappears again.
Great article via Ebert on yet another reason 3D is a hacky gimmick...
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html
focus vs convergence.
Apple's deal with LG and the progression of the AppleTV lead me to believe an actual TV is only a matter of time. One of the major issues I have always had with the AppleTV is that it requires you to change inputs on your TV and then use a different GUI than your normal tv viewing. If that were integrated with a nice new Apple GUI, it would make perfect sense. It would no longer be a "hobby".
It would be rather like Apple making garage door openers where when you came home a big bright blue Apple logo appeared on your garage door as it was opening....Hmmmm!
TV: No wires, simplified remote, no components and an Apple UI. When can I pre-order?
or they can just make an even bigger iMac
Well based on what Apple charges for a 27" monitor I hate to see the cost of a 50" TV.
Apple didn't invent the mp3 player, but their designs changed the game. No reason why this would be any different.
If you don't think that Apple could be looking at televisions, you are extremely shortsighted. An end user experience of having all home devices connected and streaming information has been a goal of many manufacturers (Samsung, Sony, etc.), but up to this point, has been clunky at best. If I could get a 50" television that had an integrated Apple OS, Apple TV, camera, use my iPod Touch as a remote for everything, and stream music and video without the addition of another device, I'd get it. Maybe even add some touch screen elements as well.
Apple didn't invent the mp3 player, but their designs changed the game. No reason why this would be any different.
Bingo!
I think Apple would like nothing more than to have an Apple logo at the bottom of the screen with every one in the family staring at it all day long...they could even have a momentary flash of the Apple logo at start up when you switch your TV on.
It would be rather like Apple making garage door openers where when you came home a big bright blue Apple logo appeared on your garage door as it was opening....Hmmmm!
TV: No wires, simplified remote, no components and an Apple UI. When can I pre-order?
Well also think what this might cost. Apple charges 999.00 for their 27" LED monitor. You have to figure something around 50" is going to be close to 3000.00 at least coming from Apple.
Also Apple would have to make it a matte screen or some kind of anti glare which they don't seem to be into these days.
It would be very nice I am sure but doesn't seem to fit into the direction they going in right now when it comes to any of their displays.
Add a 30" this year to the iMac refresh and include an option to add an internal AppleTV. I plan on replacing my original G5 iMac (ordered the day it was announced) with a new one (to be ordered the day the Sandy Bridge is announced) and I would pay for a 30" upgrade, especially if AppleTV is included.
As for the $3.9 Billion, I can see displays as being at the top of the list. I can also see Apple being willing to invest more (up to $10 Billion) for other enhancements, like doubling the size of their new server farm, enhancing protection for other components for their mobile lines (including capital investments capital equipment for producing memory.
What else would Apple potentially need that would benefit from pre-payments.
Aircraft aluminum.