1) Apple licenses with TV makers to offer "TV + iCloud" TVs to vendors. This opens up Apple's potential market to multiple companies, with multiple panel ties and even more sizes without the need for them to carry a single one in their relatively small stores.
2) Apple licenses with TV makers to offer ""TV + iCloud"-compatible devices to vendors. TV run the same way you'd expect them to, with all their standard I/O and UIs, but have a special I/O for a simple plug-in AppleTC device that will allow the TV to use that for its UI and attach to the back of the TV (even connecting to it's IR sensor).
3) Apple creates a new AppleTV to sell in their storers that exceeds $99 in price. Something along the lines of what a cable box or HD TiVo sells for at full price. THis new box is the receiver of all your other devices with all their HDMI, Coax, and optical cables going into the back of this device. THe TV is just a dumb monitor, set to HDMI and all other switching between your TiVo, Cable (which .can use a cable card that is plugged into this AppleTV), and Blu-ray player are all switched from the AppleTV interface, not the TV.
Are those enough ideas?
Those are good, but here's my favorite:
4) Apple creates two models: 42" with AppleTV+CableCard+500GB disk for $1699. 50" with AppleTV+CableCard+2TB drive for $1999. Styling reminiscent of the iMac.
Screw the coax in the back and you're done. iPod/iPhone/iPad remote + HDMI out to your sound system + HDMI inputs for your Blu-Ray and game console if needed.
With the rumors of Apple offering 1080p video in iTunes, it does seem logical that such a move would support things like a Retina Display iPad+, a new apple TV 3 and an Apple-branded LCD television.
Oh, yeah. This rumor. I forgot about it because of how COMPLETELY STUPID it is.
There's no money in HDTVs. Why sell the TV when you can sell an interface that is SO good that no one would ever use anyone else's?
*coughA5AppleTVcough*
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
It is the interface Apple could bring that makes this a vague possibility but if they could somehow develop the interface to run on any TV that makes it better then that would be great too, just not sure how they do that or create revenues from it. FiOS just updated their interface where we are in Florida and it is worse than ever. The people that design the user interfaces for programming the HD-DVR must be rejects from Microsoft.
Agreed. I've not seen a cable or satellite box that has a good UI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
One way in which Apple could "fix" the TV for instance is to make one with built in sound that actually doesn't suck. I'm in the market for my first flat screen plasma and I had no idea that basically *none* have decent sound built in.
Why should I have to buy a "stereo" (an ancient concept if ever there was one), with auxiliary speakers and set them up around the room? What do I even have to plug into said stereo? I don't play LPs, CDs, DVDs, cassette tapes, VHS tapes, or even miniDV tapes anymore. I don't have "tuner" to listen to old fashioned radio, I don't have cable or a TV tuner, I don't even have rabbit ears. Why can't the TV just handle the sound?
One thing I do is have a stereo amp connected to my TV's audio output jacks. It doesn't have a tuner, switcher or remote. I bought a class-T amp on eBay for $25 and its core chip is what does the magic in terms of inexpensive, quality sound.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Existing HDTVs don't totally suck, and aren't perceived to by the general public. It's not a market crying out to be redefined.
The displays out there are usually good, but the sound, remotes and UI of pretty much every TV out there is rubbish. Maybe the look of TV enclosures could use some help, but I don't consider that to be a major issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer
First off content isn't necessarily high margin, in fact by Apple's standards it's low margin. The existing iTunes business exists to sell devices, not the other way around. An Apple TV card introduces the same issues that made the ROKR a failure, no connection to the consumer and no control over the experience.
The existing Apple TV doesn't exist in order to sell content really, it exists to round out the platform ecosystem.
I agree, the cheap handle, expensive razor model isn't what Apple does with media. It's the other way around from the perspective of iDevice vs. iTunes media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
Who said it was going to be a 27" TV? If people only wanted a 27" TV for that price, then you just get an iMac. Most proponents of a hypothetical Apple HDTV panel seem to be asking for something in the 50" range. Edit: OK, Mr. Peabody suggested that, but I think that suggestion is an outlier.
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
Good point. There may be no margins in the TV set business and I imagine there is very little money in the computer monitor business, yet Apple does well with the iMac.
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
Well, the $1,899 for a 27" is ridiculous and I know you are being facetious, but why would anybody spend $300.- and then a high monthly charge for a cell phone when you can get one for free?
Why stop at $1900? You can invent even more ridiculous strawmen if you try - I know you have it in you. Go on, try it with $2000.
I was taking someone else up on the suggestion that they'd shove Apple TV internals into a 27" Cinema Display casing.
For what prices do YOU think Apple would sell its sizes? Tell me them and then add $400 and you'd be near the real prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Well, the $1,899 for a 27" is ridiculous and I know you are being facetious, but why would anybody spend $300.- and then a high monthly charge for a cell phone when you can get one for free?
1. That doesn't have squat to do with what I said...
2. That's the basis for the arguments for smartphones: cheap phone, $70 a month plan. You're not getting the plan for free, just like you wouldn't be getting video content from iTunes for free with an integrated Apple HDTV.
1. That doesn't have squat to do with what I said...
2. That's the basis for the arguments for smartphones: cheap phone, $70 a month plan. You're not getting the plan for free, just like you wouldn't be getting video content from iTunes for free with an integrated Apple HDTV.
1. Well it does...
2. I think you are entirely fixated on the hardware. Apple would OBVIOUSLY not be getting into the TV business to make money off dumb screens. These would be 'smart TVs' that will cost more. Like smartphones.
3. Apple would not get into the smartTV business without adding value. Added services will cost more but the entire package will be attractive.
Could Apple come out with a new display technology to give existing tech a kick in the pants? SED was very promising but hit legal and manufacturing problems; or maybe FED, or something like LaserVue? LCD and LED TVs throw a great picture at native resolutions, but they always seem "pixelly" to my eye.
IIRC, the "Retina Display" of the iPhone was a big leap forward in handheld resolution. Could Apple pull something similar in the living room? I'm not suggesting Apple pull their own amazing tech out of thin air. They have very smart people who can search for under-utilized tech and patents and join up with a manufacturing partner to give some obscure but superior technology the Apple spotlight.
Otherwise:
Yeah, the UI on a TV is used very little; no point in innovating there.
The UI on cable box/tuner could use a serious overhaul, but...
The cable companies and content providers control the bandwidth to the home. Like the cell phone carriers they have little incentive to innovate with their exclusive regional contracts and captive subscriber bases.
Steve is on the Disney BoD and Disney controls a lot of media (ESPN). If Steve could get Disney to work with Apple in some radical new delivery paradigm, that could help a lot.
Apple's other choice is broadband/Internet. But the cable companies are getting nervous in that arena too with talks of bandwidth caps, the "tiered" Internet and the like. I'd be nervous if my business model depended on delivering lots of bits to US subscribers (other countries have better high speed infrastructure than the US, see South Korea).
An Apple branded TV could drive people to iTunes. I think NetFlix is doing well with game console delivery, and the many other platforms it's available through.
I'm not convinced Apple is going to be making TV's myself but as someone who finds themselves shopping for a new TV this week I sure wish they would. What's out there is just horrendous.
One way in which Apple could "fix" the TV for instance is to make one with built in sound that actually doesn't suck. I'm in the market for my first flat screen plasma and I had no idea that basically *none* have decent sound built in.
Why should I have to buy a "stereo" (an ancient concept if ever there was one), with auxiliary speakers and set them up around the room? What do I even have to plug into said stereo? I don't play LPs, CDs, DVDs, cassette tapes, VHS tapes, or even miniDV tapes anymore. I don't have "tuner" to listen to old fashioned radio, I don't have cable or a TV tuner, I don't even have rabbit ears. Why can't the TV just handle the sound?
I play my music through my TV via AppleTV and do the same for my TV Shows, Movies etc. All I want is a TV that is a giant slab for the living room that has a single HDMI input for the AppleTV, a good screen, and nice sound. Hang it on the wall, ... done.
When I realised that this is what I was looking for, it sounded very "Apple-esque" to me. The very description of a TV Apple might make. One slab, one power button, one cord on the back.
It's all I need and likely all a lot of folks will need soon.
IMHO, I think this whole notion of entering the TV arena to be a non-starter. Think of it this way .... why would Apple limit themselves to just their brand of TVs when they already have a device that will enhance the user experience of existing TV's from all of the manufactures out there? .... and can be done a whole lot cheaper than replacing your TV every 3-5 years. Just keep on improving AppleTV and let the Sony's of the world fight it out between themselves for the TV.
This whole story is the result of some writer who has nothing of value to say .... but says it anyway. Oh well .... a slow news day, I guess.
Yeah, sure. Those are great ideas, and I'd buy at least one of those variations, and seem like logical extensions of the Apple TV model. But they don't involve Apple manufacturing and selling big flat panels of glass that hang on your living room wall. I thought that was what folks were talking about with an Apple HDTV.
I think many are expecting, but I like you just don't see it that a viable option so I instead posted what I think are three reasonable avenues Apple could take to dominate the home entertainment system.
I kinda like this one from LG for around $1500. Figure to add a soundbar tho, since as the Professor mentioned, great sound from any of the HDTV's built-in audio systems isn't very likely.
1. For those who think Apple has shot its wad on computers, tabs and phones -- and that it's going to need a new product dimension to keep its growth going -- I emphatically disagree. I think the steepest growth curve over the next few years won't be hardware; it'll likely be the App Store, where Apple's margins are far greater than in any iDevice or laptop. IMO, The App Store, while already pretty damned successful, hasn't even begun to hit stride, particularly in the realm of desktop apps. When ubiquitous applications like MS Office, Adobe CS, etc etc start to appear on the App Store, there's going to be a LOT of room to grow, at a profitability point that will water our eyes. So there's that to think about. The newest, coolest hardware will always be a huge plank in Apple's business model, but I suspect third-party software is going to get very, very big in the next few years.
2. When these rumors about an Apple HDTV appeared a few months ago, I thought they were absolutely ludicrous. But now I'm not so sure. I take the point about margins, but agree with some posters that Apple can eke out decent profits if their industrial design is superior, their price point is robust, and their supply chain is insanely efficient. The UI question is a tougher one; it's hard to see how a primarily passive activity like TV watching is begging for a UI rethink. So I've moved to 50/50 on this one.
3. Maynard Um is a complete nub. Sadly, yet another example of a highly-paid 'analyst' on Wall Street who doesn't understand the first thing about what he's paid to analyze. He's focused on the bark on the trees, without realizing that there's a tree there, and a forest too. I'm reminded of a breakfast I had a few weeks ago, with another street analyst (at a very big bank) focused on online coupon companies. Google Offers had been announced the day before to much fanfare, and this boob hadn't even heard of it yet, nor stopped to think about how vulnerable Groupon is to Google's distribution. Man, I just about threw the guy out a window, it made me so disgusted. Oh, and Maynard -- take a thousand bucks from the millions you make, and find someone who can wrassle Photoshop Elements. What a nub.
4. Anyone know a great 42" LCD for under $800? It's the wife's birthday coming up, so, you know.
I think he's suggesting it would be an additional offering on top of the existing free in-store service. You could pay for them to come and do an in-site installation etc.
Folks have been yelling for Apple onsite for years. If they haven't done it by now they are likely too.
And in a way it makes sense. For years before Apple stores, the indie boys covered that need. Now with the growing number of stores many of them have lost a lot of business. So it is a fair move to let them keep onsite
I kinda like this one from LG for around $1500. Figure to add a soundbar tho, since as the Professor mentioned, great sound from any of the HDTV's built-in audio systems isn't very likely.
You might want to pend some time watching stuff on those Lcds with the high refresh rate. I noticed from time to time (just in passing while at the store) that sometimes the picture looks funny. Film or tv will briefly look almost like live video. I don't know if that was from some extra process the tv was doing or is just a side effect of 120 mhz refresh but I found it oddly annoying.
I skipped the soundbar and went with a small 40 watt powered speaker set up. In my set up it looks unobtrusive and sounds good.
I also have a surround sound set up but never use it.
Back on topic, I think before/if Apple enters the Hdtv market we will first see them experiment more with the Atv. Most likely adding cable card/dvr functions. Once perfected then you would see them release some cool, killer integrated tv. Imho.
You might want to pend some time watching stuff on those Lcds with the high refresh rate. I noticed from time to time (just in passing while at the store) that sometimes the picture looks funny. Film or tv will briefly look almost like live video.
Comments
I'll take a swing at it?.
1) Apple licenses with TV makers to offer "TV + iCloud" TVs to vendors. This opens up Apple's potential market to multiple companies, with multiple panel ties and even more sizes without the need for them to carry a single one in their relatively small stores.
2) Apple licenses with TV makers to offer ""TV + iCloud"-compatible devices to vendors. TV run the same way you'd expect them to, with all their standard I/O and UIs, but have a special I/O for a simple plug-in AppleTC device that will allow the TV to use that for its UI and attach to the back of the TV (even connecting to it's IR sensor).
3) Apple creates a new AppleTV to sell in their storers that exceeds $99 in price. Something along the lines of what a cable box or HD TiVo sells for at full price. THis new box is the receiver of all your other devices with all their HDMI, Coax, and optical cables going into the back of this device. THe TV is just a dumb monitor, set to HDMI and all other switching between your TiVo, Cable (which .can use a cable card that is plugged into this AppleTV), and Blu-ray player are all switched from the AppleTV interface, not the TV.
Are those enough ideas?
Those are good, but here's my favorite:
4) Apple creates two models: 42" with AppleTV+CableCard+500GB disk for $1699. 50" with AppleTV+CableCard+2TB drive for $1999. Styling reminiscent of the iMac.
Screw the coax in the back and you're done. iPod/iPhone/iPad remote + HDMI out to your sound system + HDMI inputs for your Blu-Ray and game console if needed.
Oh, yeah. This rumor. I forgot about it because of how COMPLETELY STUPID it is.
There's no money in HDTVs. Why sell the TV when you can sell an interface that is SO good that no one would ever use anyone else's?
*coughA5AppleTVcough*
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
Why stop at $1900? You can invent even more ridiculous strawmen if you try - I know you have it in you. Go on, try it with $2000.
It is the interface Apple could bring that makes this a vague possibility but if they could somehow develop the interface to run on any TV that makes it better then that would be great too, just not sure how they do that or create revenues from it. FiOS just updated their interface where we are in Florida and it is worse than ever. The people that design the user interfaces for programming the HD-DVR must be rejects from Microsoft.
Agreed. I've not seen a cable or satellite box that has a good UI.
One way in which Apple could "fix" the TV for instance is to make one with built in sound that actually doesn't suck. I'm in the market for my first flat screen plasma and I had no idea that basically *none* have decent sound built in.
Why should I have to buy a "stereo" (an ancient concept if ever there was one), with auxiliary speakers and set them up around the room? What do I even have to plug into said stereo? I don't play LPs, CDs, DVDs, cassette tapes, VHS tapes, or even miniDV tapes anymore. I don't have "tuner" to listen to old fashioned radio, I don't have cable or a TV tuner, I don't even have rabbit ears. Why can't the TV just handle the sound?
One thing I do is have a stereo amp connected to my TV's audio output jacks. It doesn't have a tuner, switcher or remote. I bought a class-T amp on eBay for $25 and its core chip is what does the magic in terms of inexpensive, quality sound.
Existing HDTVs don't totally suck, and aren't perceived to by the general public. It's not a market crying out to be redefined.
The displays out there are usually good, but the sound, remotes and UI of pretty much every TV out there is rubbish. Maybe the look of TV enclosures could use some help, but I don't consider that to be a major issue.
First off content isn't necessarily high margin, in fact by Apple's standards it's low margin. The existing iTunes business exists to sell devices, not the other way around. An Apple TV card introduces the same issues that made the ROKR a failure, no connection to the consumer and no control over the experience.
The existing Apple TV doesn't exist in order to sell content really, it exists to round out the platform ecosystem.
I agree, the cheap handle, expensive razor model isn't what Apple does with media. It's the other way around from the perspective of iDevice vs. iTunes media.
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
Who said it was going to be a 27" TV? If people only wanted a 27" TV for that price, then you just get an iMac. Most proponents of a hypothetical Apple HDTV panel seem to be asking for something in the 50" range. Edit: OK, Mr. Peabody suggested that, but I think that suggestion is an outlier.
I was one of the one's who believed Apple would never move from PPC to Intel. People said Apple would lose its shirt trying to compete in the MP3 player business. People said Apple was stupid for entering the handset business and would fail miserably against the likes of Nokia, RIM, and Motorola. The iPad was denigrated as a giant iPod that no one would buy.
I have learned a very good lesson. NEVER try to predict what Apple will do and NEVER underestimate their ability to transform a market once they dive in. It seems inevitable that intelligent TVs are coming sooner rather than later. Right now there are baby steps but once Apple takes a shot at it all hell will break loose.
Good point. There may be no margins in the TV set business and I imagine there is very little money in the computer monitor business, yet Apple does well with the iMac.
But why would anyone pay $1,899 for a 27" TV when they can grab one for $299 and an Apple TV for $99?
Well, the $1,899 for a 27" is ridiculous and I know you are being facetious, but why would anybody spend $300.- and then a high monthly charge for a cell phone when you can get one for free?
Why stop at $1900? You can invent even more ridiculous strawmen if you try - I know you have it in you. Go on, try it with $2000.
I was taking someone else up on the suggestion that they'd shove Apple TV internals into a 27" Cinema Display casing.
For what prices do YOU think Apple would sell its sizes? Tell me them and then add $400 and you'd be near the real prices.
Well, the $1,899 for a 27" is ridiculous and I know you are being facetious, but why would anybody spend $300.- and then a high monthly charge for a cell phone when you can get one for free?
1. That doesn't have squat to do with what I said...
2. That's the basis for the arguments for smartphones: cheap phone, $70 a month plan. You're not getting the plan for free, just like you wouldn't be getting video content from iTunes for free with an integrated Apple HDTV.
1. That doesn't have squat to do with what I said...
2. That's the basis for the arguments for smartphones: cheap phone, $70 a month plan. You're not getting the plan for free, just like you wouldn't be getting video content from iTunes for free with an integrated Apple HDTV.
1. Well it does...
2. I think you are entirely fixated on the hardware. Apple would OBVIOUSLY not be getting into the TV business to make money off dumb screens. These would be 'smart TVs' that will cost more. Like smartphones.
3. Apple would not get into the smartTV business without adding value. Added services will cost more but the entire package will be attractive.
Like smart phones...
IIRC, the "Retina Display" of the iPhone was a big leap forward in handheld resolution. Could Apple pull something similar in the living room? I'm not suggesting Apple pull their own amazing tech out of thin air. They have very smart people who can search for under-utilized tech and patents and join up with a manufacturing partner to give some obscure but superior technology the Apple spotlight.
Otherwise:
Yeah, the UI on a TV is used very little; no point in innovating there.
The UI on cable box/tuner could use a serious overhaul, but...
The cable companies and content providers control the bandwidth to the home. Like the cell phone carriers they have little incentive to innovate with their exclusive regional contracts and captive subscriber bases.
Steve is on the Disney BoD and Disney controls a lot of media (ESPN). If Steve could get Disney to work with Apple in some radical new delivery paradigm, that could help a lot.
Apple's other choice is broadband/Internet. But the cable companies are getting nervous in that arena too with talks of bandwidth caps, the "tiered" Internet and the like. I'd be nervous if my business model depended on delivering lots of bits to US subscribers (other countries have better high speed infrastructure than the US, see South Korea).
An Apple branded TV could drive people to iTunes. I think NetFlix is doing well with game console delivery, and the many other platforms it's available through.
Enough rambling.
- Jasen.
IIRC, the "Retina Display" of the iPhone was a big leap forward in handheld resolution. Could Apple pull something similar in the living room?
If they produced a really good mass market plasma screen that would be interesting - but somehow that seems implausible.
I'm not convinced Apple is going to be making TV's myself but as someone who finds themselves shopping for a new TV this week I sure wish they would. What's out there is just horrendous.
One way in which Apple could "fix" the TV for instance is to make one with built in sound that actually doesn't suck. I'm in the market for my first flat screen plasma and I had no idea that basically *none* have decent sound built in.
Why should I have to buy a "stereo" (an ancient concept if ever there was one), with auxiliary speakers and set them up around the room? What do I even have to plug into said stereo? I don't play LPs, CDs, DVDs, cassette tapes, VHS tapes, or even miniDV tapes anymore. I don't have "tuner" to listen to old fashioned radio, I don't have cable or a TV tuner, I don't even have rabbit ears. Why can't the TV just handle the sound?
I play my music through my TV via AppleTV and do the same for my TV Shows, Movies etc. All I want is a TV that is a giant slab for the living room that has a single HDMI input for the AppleTV, a good screen, and nice sound. Hang it on the wall, ... done.
When I realised that this is what I was looking for, it sounded very "Apple-esque" to me. The very description of a TV Apple might make. One slab, one power button, one cord on the back.
It's all I need and likely all a lot of folks will need soon.
Maybe you want the Bose tv?
This whole story is the result of some writer who has nothing of value to say .... but says it anyway. Oh well .... a slow news day, I guess.
Yeah, sure. Those are great ideas, and I'd buy at least one of those variations, and seem like logical extensions of the Apple TV model. But they don't involve Apple manufacturing and selling big flat panels of glass that hang on your living room wall. I thought that was what folks were talking about with an Apple HDTV.
I think many are expecting, but I like you just don't see it that a viable option so I instead posted what I think are three reasonable avenues Apple could take to dominate the home entertainment system.
Maybe you want the Bose tv?
I kinda like this one from LG for around $1500. Figure to add a soundbar tho, since as the Professor mentioned, great sound from any of the HDTV's built-in audio systems isn't very likely.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....t=55LV5500+LED
http://www.lg.com/us/tv-audio-video/...v-55LV5500.jsp
BTW, CNET has a article on connected TV's and the market projections here:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10263463-17.html
1. For those who think Apple has shot its wad on computers, tabs and phones -- and that it's going to need a new product dimension to keep its growth going -- I emphatically disagree. I think the steepest growth curve over the next few years won't be hardware; it'll likely be the App Store, where Apple's margins are far greater than in any iDevice or laptop. IMO, The App Store, while already pretty damned successful, hasn't even begun to hit stride, particularly in the realm of desktop apps. When ubiquitous applications like MS Office, Adobe CS, etc etc start to appear on the App Store, there's going to be a LOT of room to grow, at a profitability point that will water our eyes. So there's that to think about. The newest, coolest hardware will always be a huge plank in Apple's business model, but I suspect third-party software is going to get very, very big in the next few years.
2. When these rumors about an Apple HDTV appeared a few months ago, I thought they were absolutely ludicrous. But now I'm not so sure. I take the point about margins, but agree with some posters that Apple can eke out decent profits if their industrial design is superior, their price point is robust, and their supply chain is insanely efficient. The UI question is a tougher one; it's hard to see how a primarily passive activity like TV watching is begging for a UI rethink. So I've moved to 50/50 on this one.
3. Maynard Um is a complete nub. Sadly, yet another example of a highly-paid 'analyst' on Wall Street who doesn't understand the first thing about what he's paid to analyze. He's focused on the bark on the trees, without realizing that there's a tree there, and a forest too. I'm reminded of a breakfast I had a few weeks ago, with another street analyst (at a very big bank) focused on online coupon companies. Google Offers had been announced the day before to much fanfare, and this boob hadn't even heard of it yet, nor stopped to think about how vulnerable Groupon is to Google's distribution. Man, I just about threw the guy out a window, it made me so disgusted. Oh, and Maynard -- take a thousand bucks from the millions you make, and find someone who can wrassle Photoshop Elements. What a nub.
4. Anyone know a great 42" LCD for under $800? It's the wife's birthday coming up, so, you know.
I think he's suggesting it would be an additional offering on top of the existing free in-store service. You could pay for them to come and do an in-site installation etc.
Folks have been yelling for Apple onsite for years. If they haven't done it by now they are likely too.
And in a way it makes sense. For years before Apple stores, the indie boys covered that need. Now with the growing number of stores many of them have lost a lot of business. So it is a fair move to let them keep onsite
I kinda like this one from LG for around $1500. Figure to add a soundbar tho, since as the Professor mentioned, great sound from any of the HDTV's built-in audio systems isn't very likely.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....t=55LV5500+LED
http://www.lg.com/us/tv-audio-video/...v-55LV5500.jsp
BTW, CNET has a article on connected TV's and the market projections here:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10263463-17.html
You might want to pend some time watching stuff on those Lcds with the high refresh rate. I noticed from time to time (just in passing while at the store) that sometimes the picture looks funny. Film or tv will briefly look almost like live video. I don't know if that was from some extra process the tv was doing or is just a side effect of 120 mhz refresh but I found it oddly annoying.
I skipped the soundbar and went with a small 40 watt powered speaker set up. In my set up it looks unobtrusive and sounds good.
http://www.foundvalue.com/upload/ima...kers%20004.jpg
I also have a surround sound set up but never use it.
Back on topic, I think before/if Apple enters the Hdtv market we will first see them experiment more with the Atv. Most likely adding cable card/dvr functions. Once perfected then you would see them release some cool, killer integrated tv. Imho.
You might want to pend some time watching stuff on those Lcds with the high refresh rate. I noticed from time to time (just in passing while at the store) that sometimes the picture looks funny. Film or tv will briefly look almost like live video.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_opera_effect