Apple has really raised the bar on multi-touch user interfaces. Microsoft has the Surface, but it's expensive and aimed at developers rather than as a consumer product. I would hope that Apple has 50" wall-mounted iPad-like devices in their labs.
Until the aTV grows up, I really don't see a point in Apple entering the crowded and thin-magrin TV market.
A primary part of Apple's consumer products is the ability to offer an Apple controlled content service along with the product. Television studios are fighting really hard to maintain complete control of their content in a way that would not be inline with the type of service Apple would be willing to provide. Among many others this is the major reason why Apple is not getting into televisions.
And let?s not forget the GoogleTV that died because content owners didn?t want it superceding traditional television outlets, there bread-and-butter.
I don?t think many realize how absolutely complex this nut is to break. Why people think that slapping an Apple logo on an HDTV with a built in AppleTV will resolve it beyond me.
... Remember Steve Jobs mantra: The PC is dead. ...
What are you talking about? Steve Jobs has never said, nor even intimated that "the PC is dead."
One thing you can be certain of is that Apple will not enter the TV market without a good reason to do so which means a product that can differentiate itself from the herd, and that people will pay a little bit more to obtain.
It's also a 100% certain lock that if they do build a TV it won't do 'cable' "aerial' or any of that old standards junk, so we are really talking about "Internet TV" which is exactly what the current Apple TV already is.
In other words simply attaching a screen to the current Apple TV would give us a future "Apple TV." This will only happen when the screen they are attaching has some wonderful quality that you can't do without and is different from all other TV screens.
So all in all it doesn't look to be happening any time soon.
You are right Apple would not follow any of these traditional broadcast models. It would be something completely different. Television studios are scared to death of any experimentation that they feel is a threat to their current business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
It's also a 100% certain lock that if they do build a TV it won't do 'cable' "aerial' or any of that old standards junk, so we are really talking about "Internet TV" which is exactly what the current Apple TV already is.
The 27" iMac has a bi-directional Display Port. Apogee is rumored to be releasing an HDMI adapter which will theoretically allow you to input any HDMI source such as an xbox, blu ray, or cable tv to be viewable on the iMac.
true....the only thing crazier than Apple making a television is Apple making a phone (and that would really never happen).
A poor, trite analogy.
Apple can make an add-on to a TV that controls the TV. It cannot do so for a phone.
Apple, in fact, MUST make the entire phone hardware in order for the phone to perform as an iPhone. The question before us is: Why would Apple need to make the entire TV hardware, rather than a controller/add-on device? Possible reasons include:
• The TV will incorporate a touch screen.
(Obviously, that's not going to happen.)
• The TV will incorporate some sort of remote allowing you to point at an area of the screen and control it.
(This indeed seems like an Apple approach. But there are other ways to achieve this besides building the entire TV, as Wii and Kinect have demonstrated.)
What else could an Apple TV do that would necessitate Apple building the entire device? That is the question that must be answered before a serious analyst can claim that Apple is about to release a TV of some sort.
And if that question is successfully answered, another must follow: Why will this TV be so compelling that people will toss out their present TVs in favor of it? Because, in order for this to be successful, that is exactly what this product must do. That's a tall order.
It's one thing to take over the cell phone market. People upgrade their cell phones all the time. MP3 player market? Well, Apple pretty much created that one. Same for the tablet market.
But millions of people have no plans to get rid of their TVs, unless they are getting rid of a tube and moving up to HDTV. That process has been going on for years. People will not dump their HDTVs for an Apple version just so they can surf the web (they can do that more comfortably with an iPad) or so they can play games (they can do that quite well already with many add-on devices).
3D, maybe? Please. People don't know what to do with so-called 3D TV as it already exists.
There's just no compelling reason, that I can see, for Apple to build - or for people to buy - an Apple-branded HDTV. Some die-hard Apple fans and collectors would buy them, but the general public (Apple's REAL audience) has no compelling reason to.
If you can think of a compelling reason for this product - one that would have people dumping their existing HDTVs and spending a thousand dollars or so in a down economy - I'd love to hear it.
That's not to say Apple would not LICENSE technology to an existing TV maker, and let them take a crack at it. Hell, they already do that sort of thing (mainly in the stereo business). But make their own TVs? WHY?
If Apple does create a TV, it would have to prove a method to supply Apple with more earnings than just selling the device itself. Do you think they make more money off the iPhone or the apps and service? And the Apple way is to make things thin and light, well what can get thinner than a LED TV? Those are pretty darn thin already. (but they have terrible speakers, in my opinion)
What are the pluses to Apple producing their own TV?
Screen Resolution? (they already have 1080i and such)
Facetime? (it they allow the apple tv to have a built in camera and then a mount to mount to the top of the TV, with built in microphone, that would be easier and better (Works with what you already have, more willing to purchase, cheaper initial investment))
Streaming Movies or music? (already done with current Apple TV)
Touch Screen? (I think it would be annoying to have a touch screen TV, not to mention people "touching" too hard and breaking the screen)
Apps? (like what, games? You still need a remote to play. Weather / news /sports / productivity apps? You still need a keyboard, and they have News already, it would just be news on demand, which can be solved a lot cheaper and easier than a new TV)
Voice Recognition? (How annoying to say "channel up, channel up, ........" to do anything.)
Even if any of these are good idea, investing in making a TV would be a crazy amount of money, and I still dont think people would buy them, Apple would be better off buying a TV company and just putting the logo on it, but still, don't see them making enough money for the effort.
An Apple Stand alone TV is not worth the effort, but a beefed up apple TV that costs $200 would be a lot smarted route. Think playing a board game on the iPad with output to a apple TV, thus making the iPad the controller, with multiple players using other iPad's or iPhones as their controllers and the actual board on the TV? That's worth investing money into , not your own TV. It would be pretty hard for apple to create some new TV that is far far better than what is currently out there (think iPhone when it was announced). If they are not far far better, people will say Apple has fallen off. That would be more negative than positive.
Last thought, would the iPhone have sold as much if it was $500 with a new contract? No, never. Cheaper is better in today's economy. Think TV's, people buy expensive TV's, but that market is small, more people buy cheaper TV's that can do the same thing, but have slightly less impressive specs / size / weight. Again Apple makes TONS more off apps and service than the product, they would be dumb to try and change that.
Not sure what they'll bring to the table. It would be better if they worked with OEMs to include built-in AppleTVs. TV tech is changing rapidly so maybe they'll bring some sanity to the market.
"They" said the retail stores were a stupid idea and would fail.
"They" said the iPad would be an epic fail.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see an Apple HDTV that's basically an iOS device with a really big screen and a digital tuner. And when it shows up it will also be declared DOA. After it takes off wildly we will then be treated to Android HDTVs by Asus, Acer, HTC, and all the other copycat followers only theirs will be "better" because they're open and run Android. A year later Microsoft will annouce a WM7 HDTV. The tech pundits will be predicting Apple HDTV killers are just around the corner.
If you can think of a compelling reason for this product - one that would have people dumping their existing HDTVs and spending a thousand dollars or so in a down economy - I'd love to hear it.
They don't have to dump their old tv. People don't dump their old iMacs yet they continue to upgrade. Maybe I put the old 42" on the patio or in the bedroom and the new 50" in the living room, den or family room.
Not sure what they'll bring to the table. It would be better if they worked with OEMs to include built-in AppleTVs. TV tech is changing rapidly so maybe they'll bring some sanity to the market.
That makes a lot more sense to me. Get the AppleTV with a FaceTime camera into TVs. That sounds like an achievable goal that could yield high results. Apple could play the TV vendors off each other the way it has with the iPhone and carriers.
Personally, I don't see Apple trying to make an Apple HDTV. There just isn't enough reason for it. That said, I think its little black box isn't feature complete. While what it does, it does well; it just doesn't do enough. If you want people to use the Apple TV, and to use it more exclusively, I think it needs to go more of a Internet Device/Game Console route. Here is the how, and why:
1) Internet Device: Google tried to do it, with a kludgy keyboard, and an even worse interface. Apple already has a kick-ass browser in its iOS devices. There should be an easy way to browse the internet using your existing iOS device, that either streams it from your device to the screen or just straight up from the aTV. I think it will be streamed to the TV from the iOS device. Which brings us to....
2) Game Console: Whether Apple intended it to happen or not, they have one of the best mobile gaming consoles out there. Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are running scared because of Apple's meteoric rise in mobile gaming. If you think they aren't, then you have blinders on. All three rely heavily on licensing costs on the developers, and the selling of physical media for their consoles; Apple doesn't on both counts. Now, if anyone has hooked up Chopper 2 on their iPad, played it on the HDTV while playing it via remote on your iPhone know there is real value here. I can see Apple opening up AirPlay to third-party developers (video and audio stream) so it can be streamed on their aTV. Especially if they open it up to where the stream is separate from the normal view.
Let's hope Apple isn't heading toward being the next Sony; making high quality products but with such a large catalog, they aren't particularly good at anything. Their Mac business seems to be on the backburner somewhat recently, it's not as profitable as iOS so they don't seem to be pushing it as much.
How can you possibly say this? Think about it Apple currently has some of the hottest selling laptops on the market. Laptops that are bleeding edge machines like the AIRs or the new Sandy Bridge MBPs.
Beyond that Mac OS/X gets regular updates.
Quote:
I'd be surprised if Apple announced a TV, as there seems to be very slim profit margins in that area. Apple'd have to add some really, really awesome features to warrant paying the "Apple Tax" on a TV. The AppleTV at the moment is well priced, anyone can give it a go. However, a $2000 TV requires somewhat more consideration, and as has been said before, most people go for the biggest and cheapest. Apple's buying power could help, perhaps by lowering the cost of large LCD/plasma panels from manufacturers.
It isn't that simple, people don't go for the biggest and cheapest unless they are complete idiots. Further very simple features like FaceTime would be extremely attractive. An Apple TV doesn't have to be expensive either, rather it has to have the right feature set.
Go into any appliance store and what do you see but a bunch of marketing of features. Features by the way that many consumers never use, don't understand or don't really need. Imagine if Apple where to build a TV with features consumers understand, find useful and don't inflate the cost of the TV?
People seem to think that the functionality Apple needs to add costs slot. Yet AppleTV2 costs like $100 bucks or so. That cost though is offset by the reality that all TVs these days have some sort of computational capability. The point is Apple can add an awful lot of additional capability for a hundred bucks. So think about what it would be like if Apple integrated FaceTime, iOS device support, gaming, e-mail (yes e-mail or maybe advanced messaging) and other functions into a TV that costs a few bucks more than a run of the mill machine.
I think such a machine is very possible. Even then I'd be surprised if it is a large screen device but the again I'm still wishing for a wide screen iPad like device of around 7" that can do all of this.
I am in the camp that Ireland will be proved right on this.
Makes the utmost logical sense for Apple.
No, it makes no sense. Apple produces high-end, high margin products where they bring something unique to the table.
High-end TVs, while critically acclaimed by their niche users, don't sell well. Just ask Pioneer about their Kuro line, which they had to abandon and ask Sony about their XBR8, for which they had to drop the high-end tech in the XBR9, 10 and more recent series.
Other TV manufacturers have brought an elegance to the body trim of their TVs that's as nice as what Apple does in I.D.
You think Apple all but abandoned selling monitors, but will try and sell a TV? What will an Apple TV have that Panasonic Plasmas, Sony or Sanyo don't already have? One thing I think those sets lack are good user interfaces. But Apple's UI for Apple TV doesn't impress me either. While it's simple, it's also unsophisticated. Apple hasn't even been interested in supporting Blu-ray. They seem perfectly content with such artifacts as video blocking on their "HD" downloads.
An Apple TV would probably have a high-end price, but lack high-end features, such as ISF controls that permit calibrators to properly align the sets. And since Apple prefers to go it alone, it probably wouldn't be THX certified either.
Comments
They could make iBoard though.
Came here to say this.
Apple has really raised the bar on multi-touch user interfaces. Microsoft has the Surface, but it's expensive and aimed at developers rather than as a consumer product. I would hope that Apple has 50" wall-mounted iPad-like devices in their labs.
Until the aTV grows up, I really don't see a point in Apple entering the crowded and thin-magrin TV market.
- Jasen.
Time Warner Cable and Viacom sue over iPad app
Among many other this is the major reason why Apple is not getting into televisions.
image: http://fastcache.gawkerassets.com/as...mewarnerhd.jpg
Time Warner Cable and Viacom sue over iPad app
And let?s not forget the GoogleTV that died because content owners didn?t want it superceding traditional television outlets, there bread-and-butter.
I don?t think many realize how absolutely complex this nut is to break. Why people think that slapping an Apple logo on an HDTV with a built in AppleTV will resolve it beyond me.
i was responding more to the idea of apple partnering with LG to produce the TVs.
Apple already have a close relationship with LG:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=94181
... Remember Steve Jobs mantra: The PC is dead. ...
What are you talking about? Steve Jobs has never said, nor even intimated that "the PC is dead."
One thing you can be certain of is that Apple will not enter the TV market without a good reason to do so which means a product that can differentiate itself from the herd, and that people will pay a little bit more to obtain.
It's also a 100% certain lock that if they do build a TV it won't do 'cable' "aerial' or any of that old standards junk, so we are really talking about "Internet TV" which is exactly what the current Apple TV already is.
In other words simply attaching a screen to the current Apple TV would give us a future "Apple TV." This will only happen when the screen they are attaching has some wonderful quality that you can't do without and is different from all other TV screens.
So all in all it doesn't look to be happening any time soon.
It's also a 100% certain lock that if they do build a TV it won't do 'cable' "aerial' or any of that old standards junk, so we are really talking about "Internet TV" which is exactly what the current Apple TV already is.
Maybe the Apple HDTV is really just a 50" iMac.
true....the only thing crazier than Apple making a television is Apple making a phone (and that would really never happen).
A poor, trite analogy.
Apple can make an add-on to a TV that controls the TV. It cannot do so for a phone.
Apple, in fact, MUST make the entire phone hardware in order for the phone to perform as an iPhone. The question before us is: Why would Apple need to make the entire TV hardware, rather than a controller/add-on device? Possible reasons include:
• The TV will incorporate a touch screen.
(Obviously, that's not going to happen.)
• The TV will incorporate some sort of remote allowing you to point at an area of the screen and control it.
(This indeed seems like an Apple approach. But there are other ways to achieve this besides building the entire TV, as Wii and Kinect have demonstrated.)
What else could an Apple TV do that would necessitate Apple building the entire device? That is the question that must be answered before a serious analyst can claim that Apple is about to release a TV of some sort.
And if that question is successfully answered, another must follow: Why will this TV be so compelling that people will toss out their present TVs in favor of it? Because, in order for this to be successful, that is exactly what this product must do. That's a tall order.
It's one thing to take over the cell phone market. People upgrade their cell phones all the time. MP3 player market? Well, Apple pretty much created that one. Same for the tablet market.
But millions of people have no plans to get rid of their TVs, unless they are getting rid of a tube and moving up to HDTV. That process has been going on for years. People will not dump their HDTVs for an Apple version just so they can surf the web (they can do that more comfortably with an iPad) or so they can play games (they can do that quite well already with many add-on devices).
3D, maybe? Please. People don't know what to do with so-called 3D TV as it already exists.
There's just no compelling reason, that I can see, for Apple to build - or for people to buy - an Apple-branded HDTV. Some die-hard Apple fans and collectors would buy them, but the general public (Apple's REAL audience) has no compelling reason to.
If you can think of a compelling reason for this product - one that would have people dumping their existing HDTVs and spending a thousand dollars or so in a down economy - I'd love to hear it.
That's not to say Apple would not LICENSE technology to an existing TV maker, and let them take a crack at it. Hell, they already do that sort of thing (mainly in the stereo business). But make their own TVs? WHY?
What are the pluses to Apple producing their own TV?
Screen Resolution? (they already have 1080i and such)
Facetime? (it they allow the apple tv to have a built in camera and then a mount to mount to the top of the TV, with built in microphone, that would be easier and better (Works with what you already have, more willing to purchase, cheaper initial investment))
Streaming Movies or music? (already done with current Apple TV)
Touch Screen? (I think it would be annoying to have a touch screen TV, not to mention people "touching" too hard and breaking the screen)
Apps? (like what, games? You still need a remote to play. Weather / news /sports / productivity apps? You still need a keyboard, and they have News already, it would just be news on demand, which can be solved a lot cheaper and easier than a new TV)
Voice Recognition? (How annoying to say "channel up, channel up, ........" to do anything.)
Even if any of these are good idea, investing in making a TV would be a crazy amount of money, and I still dont think people would buy them, Apple would be better off buying a TV company and just putting the logo on it, but still, don't see them making enough money for the effort.
An Apple Stand alone TV is not worth the effort, but a beefed up apple TV that costs $200 would be a lot smarted route. Think playing a board game on the iPad with output to a apple TV, thus making the iPad the controller, with multiple players using other iPad's or iPhones as their controllers and the actual board on the TV? That's worth investing money into , not your own TV. It would be pretty hard for apple to create some new TV that is far far better than what is currently out there (think iPhone when it was announced). If they are not far far better, people will say Apple has fallen off. That would be more negative than positive.
Last thought, would the iPhone have sold as much if it was $500 with a new contract? No, never. Cheaper is better in today's economy. Think TV's, people buy expensive TV's, but that market is small, more people buy cheaper TV's that can do the same thing, but have slightly less impressive specs / size / weight. Again Apple makes TONS more off apps and service than the product, they would be dumb to try and change that.
Where's Ireland?
At the back of the soup kitchen line; they are out of money don't you know.
"They" said Apple would fail.
"They" said the iPod would fail.
"They" said the iPhone would fail.
"They" said the retail stores were a stupid idea and would fail.
"They" said the iPad would be an epic fail.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see an Apple HDTV that's basically an iOS device with a really big screen and a digital tuner. And when it shows up it will also be declared DOA. After it takes off wildly we will then be treated to Android HDTVs by Asus, Acer, HTC, and all the other copycat followers only theirs will be "better" because they're open and run Android. A year later Microsoft will annouce a WM7 HDTV. The tech pundits will be predicting Apple HDTV killers are just around the corner.
Ha ha ha!
If you can think of a compelling reason for this product - one that would have people dumping their existing HDTVs and spending a thousand dollars or so in a down economy - I'd love to hear it.
They don't have to dump their old tv. People don't dump their old iMacs yet they continue to upgrade. Maybe I put the old 42" on the patio or in the bedroom and the new 50" in the living room, den or family room.
Agreed. They don't have a choice. In 15 years Apple will even make refrigerators.
Do you guys remember that interview with Steve Jobs and Bill Gates in 2007?
Steve said that "there will be a computer in everything" in the future. In every devices.
So if that will be the case, then Apple has all the reasons in the world to build them.
A refrigerator is pushing it.
Not sure what they'll bring to the table. It would be better if they worked with OEMs to include built-in AppleTVs. TV tech is changing rapidly so maybe they'll bring some sanity to the market.
That makes a lot more sense to me. Get the AppleTV with a FaceTime camera into TVs. That sounds like an achievable goal that could yield high results. Apple could play the TV vendors off each other the way it has with the iPhone and carriers.
1) Internet Device: Google tried to do it, with a kludgy keyboard, and an even worse interface. Apple already has a kick-ass browser in its iOS devices. There should be an easy way to browse the internet using your existing iOS device, that either streams it from your device to the screen or just straight up from the aTV. I think it will be streamed to the TV from the iOS device. Which brings us to....
2) Game Console: Whether Apple intended it to happen or not, they have one of the best mobile gaming consoles out there. Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are running scared because of Apple's meteoric rise in mobile gaming. If you think they aren't, then you have blinders on. All three rely heavily on licensing costs on the developers, and the selling of physical media for their consoles; Apple doesn't on both counts. Now, if anyone has hooked up Chopper 2 on their iPad, played it on the HDTV while playing it via remote on your iPhone know there is real value here. I can see Apple opening up AirPlay to third-party developers (video and audio stream) so it can be streamed on their aTV. Especially if they open it up to where the stream is separate from the normal view.
If it's not plasma count me out.
I own a plasma. A Kuro. I far prefer plasma. I hope they make a plasma. However, I have my doubts it will be a plasma.
Maybe the Apple HDTV is really just a 50" iMac.
Eh, no.
Let's hope Apple isn't heading toward being the next Sony; making high quality products but with such a large catalog, they aren't particularly good at anything. Their Mac business seems to be on the backburner somewhat recently, it's not as profitable as iOS so they don't seem to be pushing it as much.
How can you possibly say this? Think about it Apple currently has some of the hottest selling laptops on the market. Laptops that are bleeding edge machines like the AIRs or the new Sandy Bridge MBPs.
Beyond that Mac OS/X gets regular updates.
I'd be surprised if Apple announced a TV, as there seems to be very slim profit margins in that area. Apple'd have to add some really, really awesome features to warrant paying the "Apple Tax" on a TV. The AppleTV at the moment is well priced, anyone can give it a go. However, a $2000 TV requires somewhat more consideration, and as has been said before, most people go for the biggest and cheapest. Apple's buying power could help, perhaps by lowering the cost of large LCD/plasma panels from manufacturers.
It isn't that simple, people don't go for the biggest and cheapest unless they are complete idiots. Further very simple features like FaceTime would be extremely attractive. An Apple TV doesn't have to be expensive either, rather it has to have the right feature set.
Go into any appliance store and what do you see but a bunch of marketing of features. Features by the way that many consumers never use, don't understand or don't really need. Imagine if Apple where to build a TV with features consumers understand, find useful and don't inflate the cost of the TV?
People seem to think that the functionality Apple needs to add costs slot. Yet AppleTV2 costs like $100 bucks or so. That cost though is offset by the reality that all TVs these days have some sort of computational capability. The point is Apple can add an awful lot of additional capability for a hundred bucks. So think about what it would be like if Apple integrated FaceTime, iOS device support, gaming, e-mail (yes e-mail or maybe advanced messaging) and other functions into a TV that costs a few bucks more than a run of the mill machine.
I think such a machine is very possible. Even then I'd be surprised if it is a large screen device but the again I'm still wishing for a wide screen iPad like device of around 7" that can do all of this.
I am in the camp that Ireland will be proved right on this.
Makes the utmost logical sense for Apple.
No, it makes no sense. Apple produces high-end, high margin products where they bring something unique to the table.
High-end TVs, while critically acclaimed by their niche users, don't sell well. Just ask Pioneer about their Kuro line, which they had to abandon and ask Sony about their XBR8, for which they had to drop the high-end tech in the XBR9, 10 and more recent series.
Other TV manufacturers have brought an elegance to the body trim of their TVs that's as nice as what Apple does in I.D.
You think Apple all but abandoned selling monitors, but will try and sell a TV? What will an Apple TV have that Panasonic Plasmas, Sony or Sanyo don't already have? One thing I think those sets lack are good user interfaces. But Apple's UI for Apple TV doesn't impress me either. While it's simple, it's also unsophisticated. Apple hasn't even been interested in supporting Blu-ray. They seem perfectly content with such artifacts as video blocking on their "HD" downloads.
An Apple TV would probably have a high-end price, but lack high-end features, such as ISF controls that permit calibrators to properly align the sets. And since Apple prefers to go it alone, it probably wouldn't be THX certified either.
I don't see it happening.