I do not know if I believe the story, but I believe Apple is working on a TV. Google is working on a TV. Apple likely doesn't want to give Google an inch.
Further, it just makes sense. Lots of people go to Apple stores. Apple probably wants more products to put in those stores. It already has experience making everything that would generally go into a TV minus the tuner.
I only hope if the rumor is true, Apple goes with Sharp, not Samsung. Sharp 1) makes better panels, 2) has a better design flare then Samsung, and 3) shares Apple's displeasure with Samsung as it too has had to successfully sue Samsung for patent infringement.
However, I COULD see Apple licensing the technology to TV vendors. Sort of like an AppleTV inside your HDTV. I think that could work out very well for everyone.
Unfortunately, Apple's experience with licensing has been lousy. Aside from the clone fiasco, Pippin was a stellar failure - but shouldn't have been. A game console and computer all in one and attached to your TV should have sold like hotcakes, but the product was never even launched.
Cool.... hope this rumor is right. Still have yet to buy a flat screen and ever since I heard rumor of this... someplace.... I decided to hold off. I always wondered why nobody was building a DVR right into the TV.
Or right into the Mac, or Time Capsule, or Airport extreme. Really it's about exploiting the OS, the network, and the ecosystem.
OS X has all this power and scalability potential with technologies like Open GL and CL, GCD, etc. I want to see it in action and in use. Exploiting all parts of the whole ecosystem, not just a stand alone piece of it.
1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
Well said. Apple could also be highly competitive on the price as the price for high quality panels are dropping. I just bought a 40 LED Sharp TV for less then $700. A company like Sharp probably would love to partner with Apple if it moves more product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigAppleW
Here are 12 reasons I see it happen:
1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
I don't like the reasons. First, an Apple set would likely be sold at 1) Apple Stores, and 2) places like Best Buy where Apple has trained sales staff.
Second, margins are razor thin on PCs yet Apple is moving plenty of Macs far out pacing the industry all while both commanding higher margins and staying competitive on price.
Third, somebody brought up shipping costs. My 40 " Sharp TV weighs less then the Mac Pro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
Some of these negatives are very similar to what people thought about MP3 Players (now known as iPods) and cell phones (now known as iPhones [or smart phones? a redefined category.])
Apple could approach TV in a similar way. In answer to your points:
1. Apple could redefine the product, add value competitors cannot reproduce, take the high end lucrative market, and slowly inch down.
2. Apple always targets the small lucrative segment first and lets the competitors fight for scraps.
3. Apple creates a new market and competes with itself. Innovation, quality, value, and scale allows Apple to make fat margins in a thin margin market.
4. Apple will sell at Apple stores and online. People who don't want an Apple TV can go to Walmart et al.
5. Thunderbolt or simple digital out solves that for those who want that experience. iTunes content from my computer delivered through my ATV 2G sounds great on my surround sound system.
I don't believe it's true in the least. For starters, how would bundling iTunes with a TV blow Netflix away? I can pay $7.99/month and watch all the TV shows and movies I want. iTunes does not offer any comparable rental service. Also, I can watch Netflix on my Wii in one bedroom, PS3 in the living room, my Macbook Pros and iPhones. Even if Apple did offer a comparable rental service, with Netflix, I'm not locked to an Apple-branded device.
Some of these negatives are very similar to what people thought about MP3 Players (now known as iPods) and cell phones (now known as iPhones [or smart phones? a redefined category.])
Apple could approach TV in a similar way. In answer to your points:
1. Apple could redefine the product, add value competitors cannot reproduce, take the high end lucrative market, and slowly inch down.
2. Apple always targets the small lucrative segment first and lets the competitors fight for scraps.
3. Apple creates a new market and competes with itself. Innovation, quality, value, and scale allows Apple to make fat margins in a thin margin market.
4. Apple will sell at Apple stores and online. People who don't want an Apple TV can go to Walmart et al.
5. Thunderbolt or simple digital out solves that for those who want that experience. iTunes content from my computer delivered through my ATV 2G sounds great on my surround sound system.
And so on.
What I don't get is people seem to ignore that a TV at heart is a one-function device: it displays a picture. Apple's known for simplifying products, but anything you'd do to a TV would make it MUCH more complex.
Also, I really don't see what an Apple-branded TV could do that any other HDTV + current Apple TV wouldn't do. Integration isn't worth more than the $100 it costs to buy an Apple TV today. This rumor is silly and needs to die.
I don't believe it's true in the least. For starters, how would bundling iTunes with a TV blow Netflix away? I can pay $7.99/month and watch all the TV shows and movies I want. iTunes does not offer any rental business.
They do actually. But the NetFlix deal is sweet and hard to beat.
That "blows Netflix away" quote in the article is another giveaway that this rumor is probably made up. But I'm sure Apple will expand into this space further in some way.
It appears that Apple might use the TV for the output device for the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch. Thus the ongoing rumor of increasing screen resolution of iPad 3 would make even more sense. With the iPhone/iPad/iPod (or something like the Microsoft Kinect or Playstation Move) as the controlling device, Apple can turn the HDTV into a big iPad, or a huge iPhone!
Name 1 compelling reason to replace an existing HDTV with an Apple-branded equivalent.
Apple is the only company with a chance to provide a TV product that can give your living room one simple remote control. Like when the remote originally came out, you had one per living room. I'd like that elegant simplicity again.
What I don't get is people seem to ignore that a TV at heart is a one-function device: it displays a picture. Apple's known for simplifying products, but anything you'd do to a TV would make it MUCH more complex.
Also, I really don't see what an Apple-branded TV could do that any other HDTV + current Apple TV wouldn't do. Integration isn't worth more than the $100 it costs to buy an Apple TV today. This rumor is silly and needs to die.
It may be a one function device for you, but most people here would laugh at the notion. You sound a bit like Steve Balmer commenting on the iPhone. In any case, in getting my ATV hooked up I spent almost as much on cables etc. as I did for the ATV (I got a refurbished ATV ($85) and had to do a little finagling to make full use of my surround sound system and DVD player) HDMI switch with remote, 4 optical cables, 4 HDMI cables, and an optical switch.
With 6 remotes, and 5 possible sources, my mother could never watch "simple TV" on her own at my house! Even I get confused.
I only hope if the rumor is true, Apple goes with Sharp, not Samsung. Sharp 1) makes better panels, 2) has a better design flare then Samsung, and 3) shares Apple's displeasure with Samsung as it too has had to successfully sue Samsung for patent infringement.
Design flare? You don't mean to suggest Apple would leave the design to someone else, do you?
Comments
Here are 12 reasons I see it happen:
1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
Further, it just makes sense. Lots of people go to Apple stores. Apple probably wants more products to put in those stores. It already has experience making everything that would generally go into a TV minus the tuner.
I only hope if the rumor is true, Apple goes with Sharp, not Samsung. Sharp 1) makes better panels, 2) has a better design flare then Samsung, and 3) shares Apple's displeasure with Samsung as it too has had to successfully sue Samsung for patent infringement.
Nope.
As written, I think it's nonsense.
However, I COULD see Apple licensing the technology to TV vendors. Sort of like an AppleTV inside your HDTV. I think that could work out very well for everyone.
Unfortunately, Apple's experience with licensing has been lousy. Aside from the clone fiasco, Pippin was a stellar failure - but shouldn't have been. A game console and computer all in one and attached to your TV should have sold like hotcakes, but the product was never even launched.
Cool.... hope this rumor is right. Still have yet to buy a flat screen and ever since I heard rumor of this... someplace.... I decided to hold off. I always wondered why nobody was building a DVR right into the TV.
Or right into the Mac, or Time Capsule, or Airport extreme. Really it's about exploiting the OS, the network, and the ecosystem.
OS X has all this power and scalability potential with technologies like Open GL and CL, GCD, etc. I want to see it in action and in use. Exploiting all parts of the whole ecosystem, not just a stand alone piece of it.
Here are 12 reasons I see it happen:
1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
Here are 12 reasons I see it happen:
1. Apple has been selling computer displays for a decades and they've often featured best in class. What's a TV but a monitor with a tuner?
2. Jobs has always wanted to follow in Sony's footsteps.
3. Remember the speaker system that Apple sold? Jobs likes electronics.
4. Apple likes to reinvent things. Why not TV next?
5. Apple wants to control the whole ecosystem with computing. With mobile. Soon with TV.
6. An Apple TV with your iPhone/iPod/iPad as a remote control. Natural.
7. Apple could get fetch a bigger margin on TVs than anybody in the world.
8. It's a big market.
9. Apps on the biggest screen in the house...makes a lot of sense.
10. Apple will sell the thing with ONE cable that will handle every input and output.
11. It's a perfect way to sell more content on iTunes
12. It will probably have a great audio system included. All in One.
Seriously, I'm not going to upgrade my HDTV every two years because it won't run the latest iOS. I'd like to get 5-7 years out of my TVs.
I'd rather have a box I upgrade separately from everything else.
If I had to guess a display partner though it would be Samsung because of all the current legal flap.
Second, margins are razor thin on PCs yet Apple is moving plenty of Macs far out pacing the industry all while both commanding higher margins and staying competitive on price.
Third, somebody brought up shipping costs. My 40 " Sharp TV weighs less then the Mac Pro.
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
Some of these negatives are very similar to what people thought about MP3 Players (now known as iPods) and cell phones (now known as iPhones [or smart phones? a redefined category.])
Apple could approach TV in a similar way. In answer to your points:
1. Apple could redefine the product, add value competitors cannot reproduce, take the high end lucrative market, and slowly inch down.
2. Apple always targets the small lucrative segment first and lets the competitors fight for scraps.
3. Apple creates a new market and competes with itself. Innovation, quality, value, and scale allows Apple to make fat margins in a thin margin market.
4. Apple will sell at Apple stores and online. People who don't want an Apple TV can go to Walmart et al.
5. Thunderbolt or simple digital out solves that for those who want that experience. iTunes content from my computer delivered through my ATV 2G sounds great on my surround sound system.
And so on.
Some of these negatives are very similar to what people thought about MP3 Players (now known as iPods) and cell phones (now known as iPhones [or smart phones? a redefined category.])
Apple could approach TV in a similar way. In answer to your points:
1. Apple could redefine the product, add value competitors cannot reproduce, take the high end lucrative market, and slowly inch down.
2. Apple always targets the small lucrative segment first and lets the competitors fight for scraps.
3. Apple creates a new market and competes with itself. Innovation, quality, value, and scale allows Apple to make fat margins in a thin margin market.
4. Apple will sell at Apple stores and online. People who don't want an Apple TV can go to Walmart et al.
5. Thunderbolt or simple digital out solves that for those who want that experience. iTunes content from my computer delivered through my ATV 2G sounds great on my surround sound system.
And so on.
What I don't get is people seem to ignore that a TV at heart is a one-function device: it displays a picture. Apple's known for simplifying products, but anything you'd do to a TV would make it MUCH more complex.
Also, I really don't see what an Apple-branded TV could do that any other HDTV + current Apple TV wouldn't do. Integration isn't worth more than the $100 it costs to buy an Apple TV today. This rumor is silly and needs to die.
I don't believe it's true in the least. For starters, how would bundling iTunes with a TV blow Netflix away? I can pay $7.99/month and watch all the TV shows and movies I want. iTunes does not offer any rental business.
They do actually. But the NetFlix deal is sweet and hard to beat.
That "blows Netflix away" quote in the article is another giveaway that this rumor is probably made up. But I'm sure Apple will expand into this space further in some way.
Name 1 compelling reason to replace an existing HDTV with an Apple-branded equivalent.
Apple is the only company with a chance to provide a TV product that can give your living room one simple remote control. Like when the remote originally came out, you had one per living room. I'd like that elegant simplicity again.
What I don't get is people seem to ignore that a TV at heart is a one-function device: it displays a picture. Apple's known for simplifying products, but anything you'd do to a TV would make it MUCH more complex.
Also, I really don't see what an Apple-branded TV could do that any other HDTV + current Apple TV wouldn't do. Integration isn't worth more than the $100 it costs to buy an Apple TV today. This rumor is silly and needs to die.
It may be a one function device for you, but most people here would laugh at the notion. You sound a bit like Steve Balmer commenting on the iPhone. In any case, in getting my ATV hooked up I spent almost as much on cables etc. as I did for the ATV (I got a refurbished ATV ($85) and had to do a little finagling to make full use of my surround sound system and DVD player) HDMI switch with remote, 4 optical cables, 4 HDMI cables, and an optical switch.
With 6 remotes, and 5 possible sources, my mother could never watch "simple TV" on her own at my house! Even I get confused.
As far as screen sizes it is much less problematic - starting with 30, 40 & 50" models.
One other point - the day Apple starts selling TV sets in the apple store is the day Apple needs to set up a 'pro' division.
They'll have two sizes, not three. They may even only have one size.
This TV will be a big deal for Apple, but it won't change the company. The iPad is no different.
I was also thinking $2000 was a little too high, but Apple seems to be doing well with its significantly higher priced Mac lineup.
iTV won't be $2,000. it will cost less.
I only hope if the rumor is true, Apple goes with Sharp, not Samsung. Sharp 1) makes better panels, 2) has a better design flare then Samsung, and 3) shares Apple's displeasure with Samsung as it too has had to successfully sue Samsung for patent infringement.
Design flare? You don't mean to suggest Apple would leave the design to someone else, do you?