Steve Jobs left iTunes creator in charge of connected TV initiative

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 69
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post


    Oh, I completely 'got it', what little there was to get. It was just so terribly tired and lame is all. Kinda sad really.



    Apple already makes the box you think they'll make. Look at what Steve said. He's very specific.
  • Reply 22 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    If Apple can make everything else besides the screen (and they already do almost with the current Apple TV), why wouldn't they make the screen as well if they can get a good price on components?



    1) Because in order to buy this thing, you have to dump your existing TV. This is not a market (like the iPod market, like the iPhone market, like the iPad market) where Apple's product defines a brand-new, wide open market. People already HAVE TVs. This thing would have to be so radical that people would feel as if they never had a worthwhile TV before it came.



    You could say that about other Apple products: People never owned/used/cared about MP3 players until Apple came along. Same thing re tablets until Apple came along. Same thing about smartphones.



    But people HAVE TVs. They have add-on boxes. They have TiVos. Apple may improve the experience but it's unlikely they'll define a product category here.



    2) Because making the screen means now they have to get the thing into Sears, Best Buy, etc., and fight for space among all the other TVs. It's a bad strategy to do that, and it's also a bad strategy NOT to do it. That is, if they're making the entire TV.



    But if they're making something that works with sets that are "Made for AppleTV", then they have TV manufacturers elbowing each other out of the way hoping that gives them an edge. These manufacturers already HAVE floor space and distribution channels.



    Compare with this: For all Apple's success in wide-open, new markets it defines, its progress in gaining share among PC makers has only been gradual. That's because people HAVE PCs. It's not a new market Apple can define.



    Same deal with TVs.
  • Reply 23 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    I disagree that they won't make their own TV (if they go into the market at all). It just doesn't make sense to me.



    If Apple can make everything else besides the screen (and they already do almost with the current Apple TV), why wouldn't they make the screen as well if they can get a good price on components? (and of course they can)



    To assume they will need to "keep the TV" and just connect their box to it, is to assume that the stuff that's already connected to this TV is part of the plan. I don't see that it is. It also just makes Apple one of the many boxes connected to a TV. They already have that in Apple TV and while it's popular it's hardly going to take over the market. They will aim for a one-stop solution that *replaces* all those other boxes instead.



    An Apple branded TV wouldn't have many connectors, it wouldn't have external speakers, it wouldn't have cable. And once you take that stuff away, all that's left is the screen and the software.



    The only thing I disagree with in your post is the cable connection. I think that it would include it. Cable companies are already rolling out apps with subscriptions. Why wouldn't you get a cable plan with just a cable and no box and premium cable apps with a subscription fee?
  • Reply 24 of 69
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    ahem..



    Unless Siri is enabled through a connected device. Not intended for use across a room but with your iPhone, iPad or iPod if you so choose.
  • Reply 25 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Apple already makes the box you think they'll make. Look at what Steve said. He's very specific.



    I could be wrong. But you're (and others here are) interpreting his words and deciding 'it must therefore be this'. I see (and have described) the problems with the approach of building/marketing an entire TV.



    The biggest problem, which is worth reiterating, is this: Apple has done incredibly well in markets it more or less 'created' and defined. But it has done much less well with its computers. By which I mean, yes, the computers are selling quite well these days. But they do not dominate the market, even now. PCs do.



    That's because Apple did not get (or I should say 'seize') the opportunity to get out in front and define the PC market. MicroSoft did, by cloning its products. Apple did not need to license the iPod or iPad because they were out front with the right product from the get go and were very aggressive. But with the iPhone, they came up against a very aggressive competitor in Google - which cloned its products - and Apple does NOT dominate in smartphones (in the sense that more Androids are sold).



    Therefore, because Apple is hardly the first TV manufacturer, they do NOT have a wide-open field here. If they make a standalone TV, even a company at the height of its powers like Apple is going to have a difficult time defining this product category. History shows us this.



    The solution is the 'Made for AppleTV' brand, with manufacturers making Apple-spec'd products designed to work with the AppleTV box. This is 'cloning' in a sense, and solves all kinds of problems Apple faces in getting this device accepted and into homes - where it will work with (and therefore sell) more iPhones and iPods and iPads. (And for Apple, that is where the real money is.)



    Now, you can argue that Apple did just fine, as it turned out, in deciding NOT to clone its MacOS machines. True. But there's a bigger picture. There are two main computer operating systems in the world (three if you count Linux). Apple makes superior and fairly-priced PCs, so therefore it should sell about half the computers, no? But it clearly does not. Even with only one or two rival systems, it sells a very modest share of the world's computers.



    Apple has always made a better machine. The VCR was also inferior to BetaMax. But there are factors of distribution, consumer education, habit, and mindshare that very often trump merely having a somewhat better product. Apple triumphed with iPods and iPads because they could define the entire product space AND make a superior product. There simply was nothing else.



    But there are a zillion TVs out there, made by a boatload of manufacturers. For the headache of fighting for floor space at Sears, etc., and attempting to educate floor salesmen (something that did not work for Macs, thus Apple's retail stores were born) Apple might attain 10 percent of the TV market. If it really, really fights for it and spends a ton of money on ads. (Whereas the same effort applied to making and selling, say, more iPads would be hugely more lucrative.)



    Or it can 'clone' and get its potential competitors on board, instead of fighting them, and work to establish a standard that way. It is a path of far, far less resistance.



    So there you have it. You can go with what you think the implications of 'what Steve said' are, or you can look at the actual situation and Apple's actual track record, and try to understand how Apple might approach this particular problem.
  • Reply 26 of 69
    I know the Fanbois think AAPL invents everything, but you do know that the Fall Xbox update will make the Xbox do all of these very same things? Steve Jobs wanted to make the Xbox without games, brilliant!
  • Reply 27 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    You may be right, but that'd mean they'd have to include a camera in the bezel to Apple's specs in order to include Facetime--a must have function to make this TV truly stand out from the crowd.



    I am not sure about that.



    The iPhone, Macbook or iMac are natural devices for FaceTime style video chatting, because you're the right distance from the camera. The TV? Not so much, IMO. Where would you sit? Close to the TV? Far away?
  • Reply 28 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post


    1) Because in order to buy this thing, you have to dump your existing TV. This is not a market (like the iPod market, like the iPhone market, like the iPad market) where Apple's product defines a brand-new, wide open market. People already HAVE TVs. This thing would have to be so radical that people would feel as if they never had a worthwhile TV before it came.



    You could say that about other Apple products: People never owned/used/cared about MP3 players until Apple came along. Same thing re tablets until Apple came along. Same thing about smartphones.



    But people HAVE TVs. They have add-on boxes. They have TiVos. Apple may improve the experience but it's unlikely they'll define a product category here.



    2) Because making the screen means now they have to get the thing into Sears, Best Buy, etc., and fight for space among all the other TVs. It's a bad strategy to do that, and it's also a bad strategy NOT to do it. That is, if they're making the entire TV.



    But if they're making something that works with sets that are "Made for AppleTV", then they have TV manufacturers elbowing each other out of the way hoping that gives them an edge. These manufacturers already HAVE floor space and distribution channels.



    Compare with this: For all Apple's success in wide-open, new markets it defines, its progress in gaining share among PC makers has only been gradual. That's because people HAVE PCs. It's not a new market Apple can define.



    Same deal with TVs.



    People had cell phones, including smartphones, before the iPhone came along.

    People had laptops before the Macbook Air.



    Both products are doing well.



    And it's not just Apple that's capable of disrupting the incumbent. People had flat screen TVs before Vizio came along. Vizio is now the top US seller.
  • Reply 29 of 69
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    That fallacy being made in this thread is one where Apple is supposed to take over a large portion of the market.



    That's shortsighted"



    Apple controls the largest media store online that this world knows. So like the iPod they control and profit off of both ends where competitors could only profit off of one.



    Apple making a HDTV makes sense if you look at a TV as just an oversized iPad much like and iPad was an oversized iPod.



    It's really more about building the ecosystem than wondering what Vizo or Samsung is doing. Even with computers today there's little interest from Cupertino about chasing the low end market.



    With HDTV there will always be the affluent consumers that want to buy better than what their friends bought at Costco or Best Buy. That market is indeed lucrative and likely the focus.
  • Reply 30 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    iTV will not have FaceTime.



    What makes you think that?
  • Reply 31 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    People had cell phones, including smartphones, before the iPhone came along.



    There were MP3 players before the iPod, too, but they were niche products and virtually unknown when Apple entered the market, thereby giving them the opportunity to define it. Smartphones were at about that same place when Apple came along. That was the point I made, and you have not refuted it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    People had laptops before the Macbook Air.



    As I said, Apple is indeed selling computers. Never said they weren't. Never said Apple was the first with a laptop, either, so I have no idea what point you're trying to make.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Apple making a HDTV makes sense if you look at a TV as just an oversized iPad much like and iPad was an oversized iPod.



    You plan on holding this TV in your hand and carrying it around, do you? Going to operate it by touching the screen? I'll assume not. Bang goes that poorly-reasoned comparison.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    That fallacy being made in this thread is one where Apple is supposed to take over a large portion of the market.



    'THE' fallacy being made here, actually, is that Apple can make an AppleTV set and DEFINE the market. Apple has not actually 'taken over' any EXISTING markets under Jobs. It has created and defined NEW markets, but taken nothing over.



    It is possible that, as you say, Apple merely wants to make a high-end (i.e., expensive) product for the relative few, as Tiffany's does or Mercedes does. It's possible, but it flies in the face of the simple observation that Apple has, under Jobs (and presumably for the immediate after-Jobs period) made price-sensitive high-performance products for the MAJORITY. As they used to say, 'Computers for the rest of us'.



    So sure, the company could be making a 180 degree turnabout here, but where is your actual evidence of this?
  • Reply 32 of 69
    The guy is responsible for iTunes? That does not excite me about an Apple TV. Will I have to accept Apples Terms & Conditions every time I turn it on?
  • Reply 33 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizzpooper View Post


    I know the Fanbois think AAPL invents everything, but you do know that the Fall Xbox update will make the Xbox do all of these very same things? Steve Jobs wanted to make the Xbox without games, brilliant!



    Except the Apple TV will block trolls.
  • Reply 34 of 69
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msimpson View Post


    The guy is responsible for iTunes? That does not excite me about an Apple TV. Will I have to accept Apples Terms & Conditions every time I turn it on?



  • Reply 35 of 69
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    Quote:

    You plan on holding this TV in your hand and carrying it around, do you? Going to operate it by touching the screen? I'll assume not. Bang goes that poorly-reasoned comparison.



    Not if you're looking at it from the perspective that a HDTV is just another display hooked up to electronics. Much like an iPod Touch or iPad.



    Also remember that the touch screen need not be the surface of the display but can also be on a device that lays on the table flat. Magic Trackpad anyone.



    I've yet to read a valid argument why Apple , owner of the largest media store on the planet, should not make HDTV.



    Doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together.





    1. iTunes

    2. Apple TV

    3. Apple rumored agreement with Rovi

    4. 1080p content coming

    5. iCloud



    Hard to look past the elephant in the room here.
  • Reply 36 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by msimpson View Post


    Except the Apple TV will block trolls.



    Presumably you wouldn't buy another $1000 device just to comment on the interwebs. But seriously, the Xbox already does all these things. And it sells like crazy. And does many more things. What's the market for an AAPL TV?
  • Reply 37 of 69
    I'm sure Samsung will try to rush out their Google TV before this thing hits stores... it it's even true...
  • Reply 38 of 69
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,154member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizzpooper View Post


    I know the Fanbois think AAPL invents everything, but you do know that the Fall Xbox update will make the Xbox do all of these very same things? Steve Jobs wanted to make the Xbox without games, brilliant!



    Are you an idiot savant? How else could you know this since nobody else knows for sure what Apple's plans are?
  • Reply 39 of 69
    tcaseytcasey Posts: 199member
    if apple ever do a Apple TV Set it will have everything build into the tv including Siri,menus,facetime and itunes,gaming and more...it will be plug and play.
  • Reply 40 of 69
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPedro View Post


    That would make no sense in the context of Steve's revelation in the book. He wants it to be as simple as possible. He talks about controlling the entire user experience just like Mac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad. You can't control the ENTIRE user experience if you have to deal with other manufacturer's televisions. When he said that the cable companies' grasp on the industry couldn't be solved by selling people an add on box because they still had to pay for it when cable companies' were giving their boxes away for free, it was true. Saying that he cracked it, means that Apple would have to have the user in their hands the second they walk out of an Apple Store with one of their TVs. You get home, plug it in, sign in with your Apple ID and it already has your iCloud content already on the TV and new content ready to be purchased and watched without involving cable companies.



    An Apple TV won't have a lot of the commonly used connectors at the back. Apple is notorious for retiring old I/O in favour of upcoming new tech. Coax, RCA and component are goners. I imagine it will have to have HDMI to gain industry acceptance but even that is not guaranteed.



    A simple plug in TV with a power cable, Thunderbolt, with built in Apple TV software, SIRI for more complex actions than what Apple's simple remote can be practical for (text input), a FaceTime camera and WiFi for straightforward connectivity with iCloud and iOS devices.



    I'm convinced Apple will hit this out of the ballpark with one minor exception: the price. Apple needs to price this to sell. Otherwise it won't. The days of premium priced Apple products for fanboys are over. Apple is pricing their products more aggressively than ever. They're still higher than the competition, but not enough to keep them out of the hands of most consumers. I don't think they can sell this for more than $1,500 and that's already very high for a 50" HDTV.



    So pretty much any TV Set with XBOX360+XBOXLive+Kinect. WOW way to go. That is what Windows 8 already promised.
Sign In or Register to comment.