Verizon is attempting to integrate mobile, TV and computer, tho still a work in progress. The first time I "flicked" pics from my phone to the TV I was pretty darn impressed at how fast it worked. Steaming video from the computer to TV is also pretty good. Viewing movies on mobile using their "FlexView" works well too according to my son. Using a smartphone as the remote actually gets a faster response than using the real remote.
Personally I'm not big on renting movies, maybe one or two every couple of months. There's not that many that I care about seeing so much that I can't wait for HBO.
Steve Jobs pretty much confirmed in the biography that Apple are working on this and that he has finally "cracked the television user interface" problem.
I think Steve may have been a bit off the target with this one. The problem is NOT with the interface.
The new Apple TV could come with a naked woman to turn the channels, the problems are with the CONTENT! Here in Canada, there are broadcasting protection laws. They are so restrictive, and rediculous, that Apple TV would almost be an automatic nonstarter. It would be so neutered, as to be useless. The trouble, as noted by other posters, is to wrap up the various broadcast agreements, licenses, and other foreign customs, laws, et cetera.
The best interface doesn't help when there is little to no content to watch. Even here in Canada, we can only watch about half of the things that are available in the US. Heck, we can't even watch the original Superbowl TV commercials!!!
Steve Jobs pretty much confirmed in the biography that Apple are working on this and that he has finally "cracked the television user interface" problem.
I think most of this rumour reemergence is a result of Isaacson, but we don't know when Jobs said "I finally cracked it."
We also don't know what he meant by that. I don't thinks about the TV Ui, as you state above. That's never been the elephant in room in regards with TV; it's always been the way content is handled and controlled between networks, affiliates and content providers (who oft provide your internet). That's what needs to be cracked, and fancy TV with a better UI simply isn't going to ever break that paradigm.
Make a TV which has no digital connectors at all !
Just cable/satellite tuners + integrated Apple TV + easy remote + integrated harddisk PVR/timeshift.
You could of course airplay it by an Apple iDevice, but no YouTube and stuff! All Apple has to do to control the link between internet and LCD panel. If Apple blocks any *wild* internet content only then they can take the content owners aship.
Google has proven it's impossible to revolutionize against the content owners will. And all they want is a locked device ! Only Apple can provide it. So they should. For that they'd indeed have to produce an HDTV. Without any HDMI ports ! All stream descrambling can be done by the Apple-HDTV and users have to identify by AppleID. Recorded stuff could even go up to iCloud, pushing this one.
Just no connected devices, that's all that is to it ! Of course tech blogs will cry for the 'lost options' and 'walled garden'. But Apple needs to satisfy content owners and content consumers, not tech bloggers. If the 'lost options' can be countered with the best user experience and best content choice then this will fly.
actually, Microsloth came out with "Web TV" back in the 90's. Anyone remember how well that worked out?
As with most tech MS wasn't first and Apple had some role to play before MS got involved.
From Wikpedia:
"Co-founder Steve Perlman is credited with the idea for the device. He first combined computer and television as a high-school student when he decided his home PC needed a graphics display. Then, he went to build software for companies such as Apple and Atari. While working at the Apple spin-off, General Magic, the idea of bringing TVs and computers together resurfaced."
It wasn't later until 1995 that WebTV Networks was founded and MS didn't buy it until 1997.
I think most of this rumour reemergence is a result of Isaacson, but we don't know when Jobs said "I finally cracked it."
Did you reach the maximum number of posts allowed on this forum? Or are you holding solipsy for ransom?
I imagine that whatever Apple dreamed up is tied to iCloud, and the TV is just connected to it. However, to replace the complicated remotes, Apple could use either an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad. I'm speculating of course, but if my name were Ashtok Kumar or Shaw Wu, AppleInsider would be quoting me right now in headlines.
I think this has got to be one of the most absurb things I've heard any analyst claim (and we've heard some pretty absurd things from these guys). Nobody has a clue what this phantom Apple TV might be, even Misek says he has no idea what features it would include, and he's claiming that the competition is already 6-12 months behind? Behind what?
Given how far behind everyone was in reacting to the iPad, saying that TV companies would be 6-12 months behind in getting their reactions to Apple's product to market seems reasonable.
[QUOTE =AI said]In an interview published last week, Isaacson revealed that before he died, Jobs had three products he wanted to reinvent, with the television being first among them, followed by textbooks and photography. Jobs reportedly felt there was "no reason" for televisions to be as difficult to use as they currently are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Would anyone claim that Apple has accomplished any of these three items?
These are things that Jobs said he wanted to accomplish before he died, but clearly he died first. Isaacson was only working over the last couple of years on this book and Jobs was still saying he was expecting to live a long time yet even just a year ago. He wanted to make interacting w/a TV and getting all the content you want better, and if you believe the rumors that is all in the works. He didn't say what his ideas were in regards to photos and textbooks, but I believe I have seen him talk about tablets for everyone removing massive amounts of weight from backpacks, easier updating of textbooks, removing printing costs, etc. These are all things that exist currently, but the textbook companies aren't fully behind these methods yet. It sounds like Steve wanted them to go all in on a digital route.
They've made relatively minor incremental improvements in organizing your photos with facial recogniztion and location tagging in iPhone and Aperture, but not much in the way of improving the taking of the photos (yes, the iPhone has a great camera, but not so much better than other smartphones, and Applel should be embarrased by the cameras they've put in the Touch and iPad). The iPad is a great tablet computer, but Apple has left it to others to figure out how to use it for textbooks. And of course, AppleTV has been largely a "hobby" for Apple since it was released.
It's ironic that Apple's greatest recent success has been the iPhone and yet reinventing the phone wasn't on Steve's wish list.
The TV doesn't need reinventing. Accessing content is what needs reinventing. The ONLY time time I interact with my TV is for three things: turning in on/off, adjusting volume, switching inputs (which I rarely need to do). Everything else is interacting with the cable box or my Mac mini HTPC. No matter how smart Apple makes a TV, it's still just a dumb monitor to me. (But I'll be happy to be surprised if Apple does come up with something revolutionary.)[/QUOTE]
I can't believe any new TV can be successful. Apple does not and can not control enough of the content to make it worthwhile. It's too late, marketwise. As Jobs had said, TV is Balkanized. Apple does not have the resources to unBalkanize it.
What do we know? It will have to include iCloud as part of the solution. It will have to solve the problem of the user having VCR tapes, home movies on CDs and DVDs, commercial DVD movies, Blue-ray, maybe DVR, cable, over-the-air content. What about access to international content? And we've got this greedy Regions issues.
A simple TV, no matter how improved the UI is, is going to resolve the above problems.
Why does the mic have to be (only) on the TV? How about a remote with one 'Siri' button and a mic? Or control through the iPhone/iPad 'Remote' app (together with AirPlay)
Now you know why a lot of companies are struggling against Apple? They are staffed with a bunch of feeling smart people with no imagination whatsoever.
Not baloney, from someone who has been a big Apple fan since he got his first Apple II in 1979.
iCloud is *not* ready for prime time. The launch was just as bad as Mobile Me.
And watching the battery percent meter count off the minutes when I forget to kill every background app is a *big* problem. I thought the 3GS w/iOS 4 was bad for battery life -- the 4S can't get through an entire day without being charged half-way through. Some of us need to use our phones away from the battery charger.
Funny that whenever Apple TV rumours are in discussion, people seem to miss that Apple has a draft for the HTTP Live Streaming protocol.
It could possibly be that Apple will deliver programs as apps streamed through broadband or digital tv, controlled either by a single button remote, some iDevice or gestures (Kinect). All in a screen that again will vhage the way people imagined TVs.
The current Apple TV could provide all the technical solutions to the interface as they exist today. The reason it does not is not technical. It is human beings protecting their turf.
What the current Apple TV does not address is the quality of the TV's that you can buy today. The only reason I see for Apple to compete with Sony, Sharp, Pioneer etc. is the quality. I purchased a Sony for my first flat screen TV. I thought, this is a quality brand and it will be a good investment. The TV had a problem one month before the warranty expired. Sony fixed it under warranty. However the fix was not the problem and only masked the real problem. The real problem occured again two months later. Sony would warranty the repair work they did, which was not the solution, but would not fix the real problem because the rest of the TV was no longer under warranty. My experience with Apple is they would not handle this type of situation this way. That is they only reason I would buy a full blown Apple TV.
As dumb media is talking about modern TVs being 'connected to the Internet' the SIMPLE solution is to lock Internet out from HDTVs. By removing all HDMI ports they'd lock out YouTube (Google), XBox, PlayStation and save costs by avoiding complicated scalers, ease up settings, leaving just room for one remote.
An Apple remote like the current one. No more buttons required. No digit buttons, no nothing. Then let's see if we start seeing similar remotes by the competition and everyone will know what game is played here.
As gaming consoles become more and more obsolete, there should be no problem. All the stuff with Siri, iPhone remotes, iPad guides / iPad second displays would be an extra. For attracting the normal guy, all Internet/Wifi stuff is regardless, if not just distracting and unmanagable. Easy operation and extra content by simple choice is all it needs. So just remove useless tech and close the box, like with iPad.
The upside with an Apple HDTV would be, that Apple could even more glue users to its ecosystem. If users stick to their TV for 5+ years that'd also mean decreasing likelihood of users defecting to Google/MS ecosystems with their mobiles.
If the iTV gets frequent updates why do care for newer HDMI versions anymore ? While standard TVs get no significant firmware updates (coz vendors want to sell new) Apple could bump up HDMI capabilities frequently by iOS updates. It's not their main business.
Such a move would hurt
- all STB vendors (Motorola Mobility/Google?)
- all game console makers (MS, Sony)
- Bluray (as the only left physical media distribution)
- all internet movie rentals
The easy operation would attract me enough to kick out my Bluray+xBox which I rarely use. That closed box HDTV should attract so many game makers and content publishers, that it would also be an option for younger people.
For sure it requires a lot of cojones for Apple going to market with such a 'stripped' HDTV.
As we all know, one big reason why past smart TVs and boxes like the Apple TV haven't really taken off is because of content.
I'd say television programming can be broken up into 3 categories:
* Live: CNN, Local news, weather
* Pre-Recorded but time restricted: New Jersey Shore episode starts at 8pm so you can't watch it until then. If you want to start watching at 8:20, you can only view 20 minutes into the show.
* Unrestricted Pre-Recorded: Movies, Syndicated shows, etc.
Current cable, digital cable, and satellite providers treat all programming like it's Live. Then they give you a Tivo to record and time shift. What if you tune to a show 20 minutes in? Too bad.
The future is streaming on demand, but no one has been able to do it yet for enough programming to make it worth it.
Apple really could revolutionize the market if they can use their influence and convince most of the major networks and cable providers to allow Apple to stream all 3 types of content, along with movie studios for movies. The bandwidth and technology is here today, Netflix does it.
Unfortunately, that seems unlikely since execs have already been complaining about what Apple did to the music industry.
If the Apple TV replaces or can be used as a computer, to make a phone call? I must admit I'm not sure what it would need to do (better) then what I have right now, to make me want to purchase one?
I'm the kind of person that likes a:
- Good Camera
- Good Phone
- Good Computer
- Good Television
- Good laptop
- Good iPod
Which is why I have at least one of each of these. NO one item out there (current), can replace all of the above FOR ME.
When we start seeing the folks covering the NFL, NBA, Golf and other sporting events, snapping photo's with their iPhone
When we start seeing the folks at National Geographic using their iPhones for photo's while on Safari, or filming whales.
Might some of these things happen, yes. Might we put another few 1,000 folks (likely to more in the 10's of thousands) out of work (the paper industry & forestry business) ? yes. Are we ok with that?
Very few of us, even use what we currently have to it's fullest capabilities, and now we want to add something new to the mix.
These are very interesting times with live in (and a bit scary). I'm going to sit back and watch if you all don't mind.
Apple will pull this off like they have with 90% of there other products.
Most MFG's would love to have half of Apple's success rate for launching products.
No company in the last decade has been more successful with entering a existing market space and flipping that market space on it's head (Music, Movies, Cloud, Touch, Tablets, Phones, Laptops, All-In-Ones, Media Production and last but not least Mobile Everything).
In all most every tech market Apple has entered the market was in disarray and had no focus or path forward.
It was always put all the coolest new tech on it whether it was useful or not or needed or not.
No one ever could have seen what was coming with the iPod touch, iPhone and iPad.
I remember people were blown away with the rice bowl iMac and the Mac MIni, no one could have imagined what apple was going to release.
Heck remember the org iMac with the translucent case?
MFG's are still producing new products with design a decade + later.
So to say they can't offer anything better or people wont pay for it is short sighted.
This is Apple were are looking at not some Asian copy/cloning company with no real design or R&D.
If there is any company out there that can do this it is Apple and probably will.
We have no idea what they are going to launch but when they do the industry, critics and fans will all say "Of coarse! That is so obvious. Thats were the industry was already going".
Yet the entire industry has no clue today, but Apple will save it tomorrow.
Yup!
And you forgot the point where Apple's margins will come from purchasing millions of components and displays, paying up-front billions to build new factories and get even better quality out of their suppliers. Also brings down the prices on all of the components COMBINED for all of their devices.
I would think a 32" and a 42" would satisfy the initial "idea". It's first aimed at the apartment dwellers and the bedrooms/dens of the house. No it wont be the living room movie theater Entertainment Center of the house.... in the beginning. That is until people are clamoring for it, because they're hooked on the one in the bedroom.
Starting price:
32" - 749,00
42" - 899,00
That's with everything built in as someone mentioned above.
Actually, one of the most beautiful combos that I have right now, and have installed for 4 buddies is:
Mac Mini - EyeTV with CI card slot - and ATV2 (hacked).
Now if Apple took the qualities of those 3 devices and dropped them into the innards of a TV... how sweet would that be?! All controlled from whatever iDevice you have (I use my iPad most of the time).
Now add mobile control (recording if need be like with TVTV here in Germany) AND streaming what ever you've recorded, synced through iCloud... well nobody can deny that wouldn't be impressive.
A dream? I'm almost there now really. I basically only need a screen... which I have and is always on AV-4. More you don't need. Basically it's all overlapping tech and connections that I have from the Mini.
Let's turn this around and ask: what is an iMac?
Imagine for a moment, an "Entertainment iMac" with a bigger screen, but minus the things you don't need.
I just don't think this would be too hard for Apple, AND be able to deliver at the prices I mentioned above.
If it's doable... only Apple can make it work. Through their integration of services, engineering know-how... and massive purchasing power. Hell! They can even play the Sony's, Sammi's, LG's, etc. against each other for the best tech at the best price.
IMHO... margins is the least of my or Apple's concerns with this project. It's just gotta be "tight" integration-wise. That's all.
Comments
Personally I'm not big on renting movies, maybe one or two every couple of months. There's not that many that I care about seeing so much that I can't wait for HBO.
http://www22.verizon.com/home/fiostv/usingfios/
I really don't buy this rumor at all.
.
Steve Jobs pretty much confirmed in the biography that Apple are working on this and that he has finally "cracked the television user interface" problem.
The new Apple TV could come with a naked woman to turn the channels, the problems are with the CONTENT! Here in Canada, there are broadcasting protection laws. They are so restrictive, and rediculous, that Apple TV would almost be an automatic nonstarter. It would be so neutered, as to be useless. The trouble, as noted by other posters, is to wrap up the various broadcast agreements, licenses, and other foreign customs, laws, et cetera.
The best interface doesn't help when there is little to no content to watch. Even here in Canada, we can only watch about half of the things that are available in the US. Heck, we can't even watch the original Superbowl TV commercials!!!
Steve Jobs pretty much confirmed in the biography that Apple are working on this and that he has finally "cracked the television user interface" problem.
I think most of this rumour reemergence is a result of Isaacson, but we don't know when Jobs said "I finally cracked it."
We also don't know what he meant by that. I don't thinks about the TV Ui, as you state above. That's never been the elephant in room in regards with TV; it's always been the way content is handled and controlled between networks, affiliates and content providers (who oft provide your internet). That's what needs to be cracked, and fancy TV with a better UI simply isn't going to ever break that paradigm.
Google will accuse Apple of copying them. Remember, the Google TV came out FIRST, so anything Apple does is obviously a copy of that.[/QUOTE]
actually, Microsloth came out with "Web TV" back in the 90's. Anyone remember how well that worked out?
Make a TV which has no digital connectors at all !
Just cable/satellite tuners + integrated Apple TV + easy remote + integrated harddisk PVR/timeshift.
You could of course airplay it by an Apple iDevice, but no YouTube and stuff! All Apple has to do to control the link between internet and LCD panel. If Apple blocks any *wild* internet content only then they can take the content owners aship.
Google has proven it's impossible to revolutionize against the content owners will. And all they want is a locked device ! Only Apple can provide it. So they should. For that they'd indeed have to produce an HDTV. Without any HDMI ports ! All stream descrambling can be done by the Apple-HDTV and users have to identify by AppleID. Recorded stuff could even go up to iCloud, pushing this one.
Just no connected devices, that's all that is to it ! Of course tech blogs will cry for the 'lost options' and 'walled garden'. But Apple needs to satisfy content owners and content consumers, not tech bloggers. If the 'lost options' can be countered with the best user experience and best content choice then this will fly.
The new Apple TV could come with a naked woman to turn the channels, the problems are with the CONTENT!
I'd buy that for a dollar...but my wife might object...
actually, Microsloth came out with "Web TV" back in the 90's. Anyone remember how well that worked out?
As with most tech MS wasn't first and Apple had some role to play before MS got involved.
From Wikpedia:It wasn't later until 1995 that WebTV Networks was founded and MS didn't buy it until 1997.
I think most of this rumour reemergence is a result of Isaacson, but we don't know when Jobs said "I finally cracked it."
Did you reach the maximum number of posts allowed on this forum? Or are you holding solipsy for ransom?
I imagine that whatever Apple dreamed up is tied to iCloud, and the TV is just connected to it. However, to replace the complicated remotes, Apple could use either an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad. I'm speculating of course, but if my name were Ashtok Kumar or Shaw Wu, AppleInsider would be quoting me right now in headlines.
I think this has got to be one of the most absurb things I've heard any analyst claim (and we've heard some pretty absurd things from these guys). Nobody has a clue what this phantom Apple TV might be, even Misek says he has no idea what features it would include, and he's claiming that the competition is already 6-12 months behind? Behind what?
Given how far behind everyone was in reacting to the iPad, saying that TV companies would be 6-12 months behind in getting their reactions to Apple's product to market seems reasonable.
[QUOTE =AI said]In an interview published last week, Isaacson revealed that before he died, Jobs had three products he wanted to reinvent, with the television being first among them, followed by textbooks and photography. Jobs reportedly felt there was "no reason" for televisions to be as difficult to use as they currently are.
Would anyone claim that Apple has accomplished any of these three items?
These are things that Jobs said he wanted to accomplish before he died, but clearly he died first. Isaacson was only working over the last couple of years on this book and Jobs was still saying he was expecting to live a long time yet even just a year ago. He wanted to make interacting w/a TV and getting all the content you want better, and if you believe the rumors that is all in the works. He didn't say what his ideas were in regards to photos and textbooks, but I believe I have seen him talk about tablets for everyone removing massive amounts of weight from backpacks, easier updating of textbooks, removing printing costs, etc. These are all things that exist currently, but the textbook companies aren't fully behind these methods yet. It sounds like Steve wanted them to go all in on a digital route.
They've made relatively minor incremental improvements in organizing your photos with facial recogniztion and location tagging in iPhone and Aperture, but not much in the way of improving the taking of the photos (yes, the iPhone has a great camera, but not so much better than other smartphones, and Applel should be embarrased by the cameras they've put in the Touch and iPad). The iPad is a great tablet computer, but Apple has left it to others to figure out how to use it for textbooks. And of course, AppleTV has been largely a "hobby" for Apple since it was released.
It's ironic that Apple's greatest recent success has been the iPhone and yet reinventing the phone wasn't on Steve's wish list.
The TV doesn't need reinventing. Accessing content is what needs reinventing. The ONLY time time I interact with my TV is for three things: turning in on/off, adjusting volume, switching inputs (which I rarely need to do). Everything else is interacting with the cable box or my Mac mini HTPC. No matter how smart Apple makes a TV, it's still just a dumb monitor to me. (But I'll be happy to be surprised if Apple does come up with something revolutionary.)[/QUOTE]
What do we know? It will have to include iCloud as part of the solution. It will have to solve the problem of the user having VCR tapes, home movies on CDs and DVDs, commercial DVD movies, Blue-ray, maybe DVR, cable, over-the-air content. What about access to international content? And we've got this greedy Regions issues.
A simple TV, no matter how improved the UI is, is going to resolve the above problems.
Exactly. And you don't need to waste billions of money to enter the absurdly-low-margin TV market to do that.
Please don't.
Please do.
There are unquestionable problems with iCloud and iPhone 4S battery life.
They need to be fixed, pronto.
Why does the mic have to be (only) on the TV? How about a remote with one 'Siri' button and a mic? Or control through the iPhone/iPad 'Remote' app (together with AirPlay)
Now you know why a lot of companies are struggling against Apple? They are staffed with a bunch of feeling smart people with no imagination whatsoever.
Baloney from a hater.
Not baloney, from someone who has been a big Apple fan since he got his first Apple II in 1979.
iCloud is *not* ready for prime time. The launch was just as bad as Mobile Me.
And watching the battery percent meter count off the minutes when I forget to kill every background app is a *big* problem. I thought the 3GS w/iOS 4 was bad for battery life -- the 4S can't get through an entire day without being charged half-way through. Some of us need to use our phones away from the battery charger.
It could possibly be that Apple will deliver programs as apps streamed through broadband or digital tv, controlled either by a single button remote, some iDevice or gestures (Kinect). All in a screen that again will vhage the way people imagined TVs.
What the current Apple TV does not address is the quality of the TV's that you can buy today. The only reason I see for Apple to compete with Sony, Sharp, Pioneer etc. is the quality. I purchased a Sony for my first flat screen TV. I thought, this is a quality brand and it will be a good investment. The TV had a problem one month before the warranty expired. Sony fixed it under warranty. However the fix was not the problem and only masked the real problem. The real problem occured again two months later. Sony would warranty the repair work they did, which was not the solution, but would not fix the real problem because the rest of the TV was no longer under warranty. My experience with Apple is they would not handle this type of situation this way. That is they only reason I would buy a full blown Apple TV.
An Apple remote like the current one. No more buttons required. No digit buttons, no nothing. Then let's see if we start seeing similar remotes by the competition and everyone will know what game is played here.
As gaming consoles become more and more obsolete, there should be no problem. All the stuff with Siri, iPhone remotes, iPad guides / iPad second displays would be an extra. For attracting the normal guy, all Internet/Wifi stuff is regardless, if not just distracting and unmanagable. Easy operation and extra content by simple choice is all it needs. So just remove useless tech and close the box, like with iPad.
The upside with an Apple HDTV would be, that Apple could even more glue users to its ecosystem. If users stick to their TV for 5+ years that'd also mean decreasing likelihood of users defecting to Google/MS ecosystems with their mobiles.
If the iTV gets frequent updates why do care for newer HDMI versions anymore ? While standard TVs get no significant firmware updates (coz vendors want to sell new) Apple could bump up HDMI capabilities frequently by iOS updates. It's not their main business.
Such a move would hurt
- all STB vendors (Motorola Mobility/Google?)
- all game console makers (MS, Sony)
- Bluray (as the only left physical media distribution)
- all internet movie rentals
The easy operation would attract me enough to kick out my Bluray+xBox which I rarely use. That closed box HDTV should attract so many game makers and content publishers, that it would also be an option for younger people.
For sure it requires a lot of cojones for Apple going to market with such a 'stripped' HDTV.
I'd say television programming can be broken up into 3 categories:
* Live: CNN, Local news, weather
* Pre-Recorded but time restricted: New Jersey Shore episode starts at 8pm so you can't watch it until then. If you want to start watching at 8:20, you can only view 20 minutes into the show.
* Unrestricted Pre-Recorded: Movies, Syndicated shows, etc.
Current cable, digital cable, and satellite providers treat all programming like it's Live. Then they give you a Tivo to record and time shift. What if you tune to a show 20 minutes in? Too bad.
The future is streaming on demand, but no one has been able to do it yet for enough programming to make it worth it.
Apple really could revolutionize the market if they can use their influence and convince most of the major networks and cable providers to allow Apple to stream all 3 types of content, along with movie studios for movies. The bandwidth and technology is here today, Netflix does it.
Unfortunately, that seems unlikely since execs have already been complaining about what Apple did to the music industry.
I'm the kind of person that likes a:
- Good Camera
- Good Phone
- Good Computer
- Good Television
- Good laptop
- Good iPod
Which is why I have at least one of each of these. NO one item out there (current), can replace all of the above FOR ME.
When we start seeing the folks covering the NFL, NBA, Golf and other sporting events, snapping photo's with their iPhone
When we start seeing the folks at National Geographic using their iPhones for photo's while on Safari, or filming whales.
Might some of these things happen, yes. Might we put another few 1,000 folks (likely to more in the 10's of thousands) out of work (the paper industry & forestry business) ? yes. Are we ok with that?
Very few of us, even use what we currently have to it's fullest capabilities, and now we want to add something new to the mix.
These are very interesting times with live in (and a bit scary). I'm going to sit back and watch if you all don't mind.
Skip
Apple will pull this off like they have with 90% of there other products.
Most MFG's would love to have half of Apple's success rate for launching products.
No company in the last decade has been more successful with entering a existing market space and flipping that market space on it's head (Music, Movies, Cloud, Touch, Tablets, Phones, Laptops, All-In-Ones, Media Production and last but not least Mobile Everything).
In all most every tech market Apple has entered the market was in disarray and had no focus or path forward.
It was always put all the coolest new tech on it whether it was useful or not or needed or not.
No one ever could have seen what was coming with the iPod touch, iPhone and iPad.
I remember people were blown away with the rice bowl iMac and the Mac MIni, no one could have imagined what apple was going to release.
Heck remember the org iMac with the translucent case?
MFG's are still producing new products with design a decade + later.
So to say they can't offer anything better or people wont pay for it is short sighted.
This is Apple were are looking at not some Asian copy/cloning company with no real design or R&D.
If there is any company out there that can do this it is Apple and probably will.
We have no idea what they are going to launch but when they do the industry, critics and fans will all say "Of coarse! That is so obvious. Thats were the industry was already going".
Yet the entire industry has no clue today, but Apple will save it tomorrow.
Yup!
And you forgot the point where Apple's margins will come from purchasing millions of components and displays, paying up-front billions to build new factories and get even better quality out of their suppliers. Also brings down the prices on all of the components COMBINED for all of their devices.
I would think a 32" and a 42" would satisfy the initial "idea". It's first aimed at the apartment dwellers and the bedrooms/dens of the house. No it wont be the living room movie theater Entertainment Center of the house.... in the beginning. That is until people are clamoring for it, because they're hooked on the one in the bedroom.
Starting price:
32" - 749,00
42" - 899,00
That's with everything built in as someone mentioned above.
Actually, one of the most beautiful combos that I have right now, and have installed for 4 buddies is:
Mac Mini - EyeTV with CI card slot - and ATV2 (hacked).
Now if Apple took the qualities of those 3 devices and dropped them into the innards of a TV... how sweet would that be?! All controlled from whatever iDevice you have (I use my iPad most of the time).
Now add mobile control (recording if need be like with TVTV here in Germany) AND streaming what ever you've recorded, synced through iCloud... well nobody can deny that wouldn't be impressive.
A dream? I'm almost there now really. I basically only need a screen... which I have and is always on AV-4. More you don't need. Basically it's all overlapping tech and connections that I have from the Mini.
Let's turn this around and ask: what is an iMac?
Imagine for a moment, an "Entertainment iMac" with a bigger screen, but minus the things you don't need.
I just don't think this would be too hard for Apple, AND be able to deliver at the prices I mentioned above.
If it's doable... only Apple can make it work. Through their integration of services, engineering know-how... and massive purchasing power. Hell! They can even play the Sony's, Sammi's, LG's, etc. against each other for the best tech at the best price.
IMHO... margins is the least of my or Apple's concerns with this project. It's just gotta be "tight" integration-wise. That's all.