1. Apple need to break its predictable product launch patterns.
2. The Big, the Small and the Ugly: 4.5"+ iPhone 6, 4" iPhone 6 and a low cost emerging markets iOS phone.
3. Much lighter regular ipad, retina ipad mini at 329$ and non retina iPad mini at 249$ or even 199$.
4. 799 and 999 macbook airs.
5. Apple TV set and cable box with full cable partnership.
If Apple doesnt do anything, its going to paint itself in a corner just like it did in the 80's Android is becoming the windows of the mobile market, Apple must at least offer something mainstream or its going to lose market share to the point its just a niche market. And then all the apps dev are going to leave the boat.
Far too soon. The next two updates will be either a spec bump or maintain current specs with a price drop to start "from $299". I believe apple will hold keep their cards close to their chest here and their strategy will be determined by what others do in this category. The third update from now is conceivably the first that could conceivable offer a 4x pixel (AKA retina) display.
Quote:
June 2013: WWDC brings us previews of iOS 7, and OSX, as well as MacBook Airs with Retina displays. Look for Jony Ive's influence over iOS to start showing up here.
Macbook Airs with 4x pixel displays will only show up after the 13 inch macbook pro has a dedicated GPU as standard. Otherwise there is too little differentiation between the models. The story in 2013 will be about Apple simplfying to four models - 11 inch air, 13 inch air, 13 inch MBP retina, 15 inch MBP retina. No optical drives and SSD across the board.
OSX will shift the focus to refining the user interface experience. New interface appearance is a cheap way of adding value, will offset the comparative lack of new software features. Siri makes strategic advances, first the ability to interface with more apps then wirelessly with other devices and online services. Apple's end game is to make "Ask siri..." become the new "why don't you google...?".
Quote:
September 2013: iPhone 5S, a "modest upgrade" from the iPhone 5. The iPad Mini gets a specs bump, and we get a new iPad, which is totally redesigned to look more like the iPhone 5 and iPad Mini.
This is basically on the money.
Quote:
November 2013: An Apple TV comes out. It should cost $1,500-$2,000 and come in sizes from 42-inches to 55-inches
I don't think an Apple TV set is right. No compelling reason for Apple to compete head to head with on display hardware. Samsung is far more adept - they could just replicate Apple's strategy at 1/3 of the price - content providers would be complicit in Samsung success as this erodes Apple's clout. Talks of disrupting Cable TV reflects america-centricity of analyst viewpoints. Pay TV is not as dominant in international markets. A la carte equates to hara kiri for content providers. Apple could conceivably consolidate multiple cable plans seamlessly into one device. This could make new customers only ever one click away and reduces the complexity for the end user. The television producer/advertiser/cable company triad is too cosy for any meaningful wedge to be driven between them.
Next version of Apple TV box features a dedicated App Store. $99 + 99c apps disrupts casual console space despite lack of an official dedicated controller being a major gripe and a missed opportunity. Nintendo tanks financially as Wii U's gimmicky/middle of the road strategy fails to appeal to core or casual gamers.
You know what? Whatever. They want to build things based on rumors and what people tell them they want, it's their funeral.
Hey, Apple is releasing an xMac, too.
Hey, Apple is building a car.
Hey, Apple is making an iPhone nano.
Boom. There goes the company.
Them be fightin words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
1, 2, and 3: Not in the slightest.
Look, we're gonna get one. It's gonna be completely redone. And it's gonna be great. But there won't be any FireWire ports, there won't be any optical drives, and there could very well be no internal PCIe expansion. Just a single, double-wide 16x PCIe 3.0 slot for the graphics card. But it will be great.
75% of the existing Mac Pro userbase will whine about it, saying it's the end. The other quarter will immediately buy it and instantly be on the forefront of professional computing across any platform. Half of the 75% will eventually buy it once they see reviews and how well it works where it does, since no other computers from anyone else will be close. A quarter of the 75% will keep their current Mac Pro until it dies, all the while whining on forums about how they refuse to change and how Apple needs to meet their archaic needs. The final quarter will immediately move away from Apple entirely, and half of them will regret it once they see reviews and how poorly the crap from everyone else works.
That's a lot of fractions.
You view things in such a silly manner at times. It's very simple. You look at what is available when combining options from Apple and whatever third parties to see if and how your needs can be met. Either you will or will not have a workable solution there. One thing is that an NVidia gpu option is a necessity. It's a soft requirement for certain markets that have historically purchased the mac pro. I disagree with your analogy on keeping things until they die, or at least the reasoning. If their needs aren't really growing, it doesn't matter, and they were unlikely candidates for a new purchase. I don't personally adhere to a strict upgrade schedule. It just comes down to what I have relative to what I require. I also disagree that everything else performs poorly. Real world testing is not in your favor. When it comes to workstation apps, it's hit and miss. Some things run faster on OSX. It's usually those with large linux followings. Others evaluate faster on Windows. There's no need to insert tribalism into computer purchases.
Look, we're gonna get one. It's gonna be completely redone. And it's gonna be great. But there won't be any FireWire ports, there won't be any optical drives, and there could very well be no internal PCIe expansion. Just a single, double-wide 16x PCIe 3.0 slot for the graphics card. But it will be great.
75% of the existing Mac Pro userbase will whine about it, saying it's the end. The other quarter will immediately buy it and instantly be on the forefront of professional computing across any platform. Half of the 75% will eventually buy it once they see reviews and how well it works where it does, since no other computers from anyone else will be close. A quarter of the 75% will keep their current Mac Pro until it dies, all the while whining on forums about how they refuse to change and how Apple needs to meet their archaic needs. The final quarter will immediately move away from Apple entirely, and half of them will regret it once they see reviews and how poorly the crap from everyone else works.
That's a lot of fractions.
I'll put it clearer just in case it wasn't understood:
Ours, since that's the price needed for Apple to have its margins.
It's also why I don't figure this is ever happening.
ever compare the cheapest iPhone in price with the cheapest Android . Off contract of course. Listen up - there are 30M millionaires in the US, and you don't have to be a millionaire to afford 1-2K, if that were so capitalism would collapse. There is plenty of market in the US and around the world.
My feeling is it will be a full-fledged TV...super thin, elegant, app store, etc. I think when stevo said he "cracked" TV, he was alluding to Siri. Instead of inelegant remote control with 87 buttons on it, it would be more like, "Siri, let's here the 'Newshour'" or, "Siri, play 'Prometheus.'"
I agree with the poster above. Apple wants to control the living room...and having a huge Apple TV, (read, Apple monolith) in your living room would be a lot more of a splash than a little black box.
Best.
Yes, I think Siri could significantly change TV. The technical problems seem especially challenging, though. Background noise would be a major problem since you're sitting 10 feet or so from the TV and there are other sounds (including the TV itself, of course). While it might not be too difficult to filter out the TV's sound, you'd need a good microphone and great noise filtering software.
ever compare the cheapest iPhone in price with the cheapest Android . Off contract of course. Listen up - there are 30M millionaires in the US, and you don't have to be a millionaire to afford 1-2K, if that were so capitalism would collapse. There is plenty of market in the US and around the world.
That's exactly what many people fail to understand. Apple doesn't need to make cheap devices. The market for premium devices is huge.
Getting into cheaper devices would, of course, expand the market, but would reduce margins and profitability. It would damage the brand, possibly costing them some of the premium sales. And they'd have to cut corners in some places and offer products that are not as great as their existing products.
2) Even if they wanted such a thing, they'd probably use a computer instead of buying a TV
3) Only fools watch TV in bed (it's actually a very small section of the market)
4) It's not just about "thin and elegant" it's about "simple" (which almost no TVs are at the moment).
1) Lies
2) Lies
3) Lies
4) Doesn't have to be the TV that does it.
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Actually, Tesla uses Android…
And that bothers me to no end.
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
For some people, and for some movies, yes.
Until I don't have to wear glasses to view the content, it will be useless.
Originally Posted by Ireland
Yeah, because don't you just know Jony Ive just LOVES his dangly boxes and Samsung TV setup.
He released the Apple TV. I have physical proof that your sarcasm is meaningless.
You shouldn't need multiple devices.
You don't. You need a TV and one device. The Apple TV. Period. Swap out the stupid screen any time you want. Want it bigger, get it bigger. Want it in LCD or plasma? Get it in LCD or plasma. Get it in OLED, even. But your UI and ecosystem remains the same. Not that hard to get.
People should be able to pop the TV out of the box, enter their Apple ID and be off to the races. Boom!
Sounds exactly like the experience of anyone who has ever owned an Apple TV already.
The writing is on the wall, it's only a matter of time, they're going to make a TV not for rumors, but because that market is ripe for genuine revolution…
It is, absolutely. But not from a stupid, marginless panel.
Sooner I later you'll have to open your eyes to all of this.
Heard that about the iPhone nano and the xMac, too.
Seems that the things that "Apple has to do" are the things that it should be avoiding the most.
Originally Posted by hentaiboy
"TV turn on"
"TV what's on tonight?"
"TV change to Channel x"
"TV switch to Blu-ray"
"TV record xxx while I'm out"
"TV turn off"
"Sorry, I can't hear you over the content. Because TV has sound, too."
Originally Posted by Prima Kingu
…so what could be the iPad Mini Retina's resolution
2048x1536. They aren't going to magically change the ratio.
Originally Posted by herbapou
1. Apple need to break its predictable product launch patterns.
2. The Big, the Small and the Ugly: 4.5"+ iPhone 6, 4" iPhone 6 and a low cost emerging markets iOS phone.
3. Much lighter regular ipad, retina ipad mini at 329$ and non retina iPad mini at 249$ or even 199$.
4. 799 and 999 macbook airs.
5. Apple TV set and cable box with full cable partnership.
1. Really? When's the new Mac Pro coming out? How about the new iPhone? The new iPad? CHECK.
2. They already have that without silly sizes. CHECK.
3. I can't understand why anyone would want a non-retina device of anything, but this is obviously going to happen. WILLCHECK.
4. They don't need to.
5. Sure hope so.
Originally Posted by hmm
I disagree with your analogy on keeping things until they die, or at least the reasoning. If their needs aren't really growing, it doesn't matter, and they were unlikely candidates for a new purchase.
What do you mean, "unlikely candidates"? They WERE going to buy what is new if it was exactly the same, it wasn't, and so they didn't. That's how the pro world operates: Whine about everything that changes in the slightest from what they already know. Or at least it's what they'd have you believe. Which is why it's only a fraction of my projection.
Originally Posted by asdasd
ever compare the cheapest iPhone in price with the cheapest Android . Off contract of course. Listen up - there are 30M millionaires in the US, and you don't have to be a millionaire to afford 1-2K, if that were so capitalism would collapse. There is plenty of market in the US and around the world.
I don't get it; what's your point? As many people can afford a forced-data iPhone plan as cannot. The phone is meaningless.
The move to 16:9 aspect ratios in the iPhone 5 and iPod Touch is something I hope does not happen with the iPad. 16:9 may be fine for video but it is really lacking with almost ever other use. It's as though they want us to read books on legal paper. The 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPads give you more useable space and can be used in both portrait and landscape modes in a reasonable way. Unfortunately almost every tablet has gone 16:9. It's really a step backwards.
philip
I said iPhone and iPad mini not iphone and iPod touch. And I said design, not aspect ratio. And I agree with everything else you said.
What do you mean, "unlikely candidates"? They WERE going to buy what is new if it was exactly the same, it wasn't, and so they didn't. That's how the pro world operates: Whine about everything that changes in the slightest from what they already know. Or at least it's what they'd have you believe. Which is why it's only a fraction of my projection.
People say a lot of things. It doesn't mean they'll actually buy it. They just think they will buy it. If they absolutely needed a new machine, they would have bought one when it became clear that Apple would not update the line for a while.
I see it as coming down to growth. If they're looking to leverage desktop users from older mac pros or windows users, the important parts are modernized storage, OpenCL/CUDA options, and cpu options. I think ignoring good gpu choices alone would be enough to kill any future viability for the platform. Thunderbolt wouldn't be a bad thing, but it's hardly necessary here. If they had a better way to route it than embedded graphics, that would work. I don't see embedded graphics as a good mac pro solution, as you can't really push them any higher than the latest imac. I don't think embedded solutions really exist with the 200W cards Apple has been using, and doing anything involving a lot of custom engineering seems out of focus for one of their lowest volume product lines. What do you think would attract people to an update at this point?
Marvin showed me this link a few days ago. While you can see the option without CUDA support took way longer than any of the others, this is partially because it's not well optimized to run on the cpu. The huge point of performance growth in a lot of these areas is pushing gpu based solutions. Now if you look at the smaller bars in context with each other, you still have an incredible difference between the 650m and the GTX580. One of the remaining issues is memory. Unless you have a Tesla in there, there's a large range of problems that aren't solvable in this manner. That won't change by next year, but it's an important factor for the health of the platform if it relies on being a workstation, given that this would be a strong use case. Some of the benchmarking tests run on anything, but if you're talking about multiple 4k seamless texture maps to a variety of attributes, you can just hose the available ram on these lighter video cards. I mention this because CUDA and OpenCL represent the best cost to performance ratio at the moment when it comes to computing gains if they can be leveraged.
You know what? Whatever. They want to build things based on rumors and what people tell them they want, it's their funeral.
Hey, Apple is releasing an xMac, too.
Hey, Apple is building a car.
Hey, Apple is making an iPhone nano.
Boom. There goes the company.
Some sort of desktop Mac positioned between the iMac and the Mac Pro is the only product I want from Apple. I do not want an all in one but I don't need the overkill of the Mac Pro. Apple has nothing for the user that needs more than the mobile components mini and the Mac Pro.
I understand why Apple has the Apple TV- and I love my ATV.
The margins are small on hardware I'm sure- this is a simple intro to get iTunes easier and promote other product with functionality.
It's 8gb. Introduce apps, give us 16gb, and charge more. More margins on hardware to offset some of the apps that will canabalize itunes, but most of the Same other benefits. But at what price- $149, $199? Because I'm telling you now-- I find it highly, highly unlikely we get 16gb (which you'd need), apps, an A6 single core, and it stay at $99...
As I have said on another post it will probably be up to $150, but that would mean it to be a iPod without a screen and battery, with other ports, were also talking about $50 less to build the iPod touch 4 with they could do A5X dual core(graphics better for a tv). Plus minor improvement in speed. Cheaper materials and no need for as small so let's see here.
$70 off a Apple TV vs a iPod touch 4, Ot would estimate $30 more but in a year that could half.
MacBook Air with retina display and 756 gb hard drive? I can't wait! Then again, MacBook Pro with the option for more ram would also do the trick.
But the MacBook Air design was supposed to be "the future". It is the most, absolutely most, beautiful laptop design in the world, ever. To me, and I'm sure to many. The MacBook Pro Retinas seem a little... compromised. Their hardware and screens are off-the-charts amazing, but imagine that in the MacBook Air form factor... need not be as thin, but that sliver/wedge/triangle style... Absolutely perfect.
The MacBook Pro 15" Retina should have been more of a MacBook Air 15". In fact, the Airs should have replaced most of the MacBook Pro models this year, or at least the MacBook Pros should have become very, very much more Air-shaped.
Take the design direction of the latest iMac, thinned down to a few millimeters at the edges… remove the computer components warranting the extra depth in the back and the frontside 'chin' (which is also missing from the Apple Display)… What we end up with is a 16:9, millimeters-thick 'slab', 42" ~ 60" in size. That's what I imagine an Apple iScreen (or whatever they call their television) will look like.
Rather like a giant 'widescreen' iPad on a stand. Or wall mounted.
Probably the biggest challenge will be keeping the frame strong enough, but the lamination technique used for the new iMac display apparently adds quite a bit of tensile strength to the structure...
ThIs assumes there will be a television at all. I'm still not 100% convinced… only, 90%-ish...
Take the design direction of the latest iMac, thinned down to a few millimeters at the edges… remove the computer components warranting the extra depth in the back and the frontside 'chin' (which is also missing from the Apple Display)… What we end up with is a 16:9, millimeters-thick 'slab', 42" ~ 60" in size. That's what I imagine an Apple iScreen (or whatever they call their television) will look like.
...
Most digital television sets, including all smart TVs, are dedicated all-in-one computers with integrated tuners. Several manufacturers, including Sony and Samsung, base their sets on embedded versions of Linux. [The GPL license is included in the owners documents.] Apple will not use Linux because its iOS is Unix behind the scenes. If Apple introduces its own HDTV, then you can expect it to be an enhanced AppleTV with integrated display. The extent to which it is enhanced is the subject of some speculation. In the USA, the Apple HDTV will include a ClearQAM, and [legally required] ATSC tuners. Because so many cable providers and many power-power broadcasters transmit analog signals, there is a small demand for NTSC for the foreseeable future. It is anyone's guess whether the Apple HDTV will include an NTSC tuner. Each international model will be localized to conform with the national laws of the country in which it is sold.
As for physical dimensions, we can expect each Apple HDTV to be comparable in size but slightly thinner than smart TVs of comparable screen size for other manufacturers. There is no reason to even think of the iMac because [most] Apple HDTVs will have substantially larger displays.
There's already a network app called Hulu. Why would I pay $.99 a show when for $7.99 a month I can watch shows from ABC/NBC/Fox and a multitude of other networks?
Comments
Here is my wish list:
1. Apple need to break its predictable product launch patterns.
2. The Big, the Small and the Ugly: 4.5"+ iPhone 6, 4" iPhone 6 and a low cost emerging markets iOS phone.
3. Much lighter regular ipad, retina ipad mini at 329$ and non retina iPad mini at 249$ or even 199$.
4. 799 and 999 macbook airs.
5. Apple TV set and cable box with full cable partnership.
If Apple doesnt do anything, its going to paint itself in a corner just like it did in the 80's Android is becoming the windows of the mobile market, Apple must at least offer something mainstream or its going to lose market share to the point its just a niche market. And then all the apps dev are going to leave the boat.
Apple is Doom TM
Quote:
March 2013: iPad Mini with Retina display
Far too soon. The next two updates will be either a spec bump or maintain current specs with a price drop to start "from $299". I believe apple will hold keep their cards close to their chest here and their strategy will be determined by what others do in this category. The third update from now is conceivably the first that could conceivable offer a 4x pixel (AKA retina) display.
Quote:
June 2013: WWDC brings us previews of iOS 7, and OSX, as well as MacBook Airs with Retina displays. Look for Jony Ive's influence over iOS to start showing up here.
Macbook Airs with 4x pixel displays will only show up after the 13 inch macbook pro has a dedicated GPU as standard. Otherwise there is too little differentiation between the models. The story in 2013 will be about Apple simplfying to four models - 11 inch air, 13 inch air, 13 inch MBP retina, 15 inch MBP retina. No optical drives and SSD across the board.
OSX will shift the focus to refining the user interface experience. New interface appearance is a cheap way of adding value, will offset the comparative lack of new software features. Siri makes strategic advances, first the ability to interface with more apps then wirelessly with other devices and online services. Apple's end game is to make "Ask siri..." become the new "why don't you google...?".
Quote:
September 2013: iPhone 5S, a "modest upgrade" from the iPhone 5. The iPad Mini gets a specs bump, and we get a new iPad, which is totally redesigned to look more like the iPhone 5 and iPad Mini.
This is basically on the money.
Quote:
November 2013: An Apple TV comes out. It should cost $1,500-$2,000 and come in sizes from 42-inches to 55-inches
I don't think an Apple TV set is right. No compelling reason for Apple to compete head to head with on display hardware. Samsung is far more adept - they could just replicate Apple's strategy at 1/3 of the price - content providers would be complicit in Samsung success as this erodes Apple's clout. Talks of disrupting Cable TV reflects america-centricity of analyst viewpoints. Pay TV is not as dominant in international markets. A la carte equates to hara kiri for content providers. Apple could conceivably consolidate multiple cable plans seamlessly into one device. This could make new customers only ever one click away and reduces the complexity for the end user. The television producer/advertiser/cable company triad is too cosy for any meaningful wedge to be driven between them.
Next version of Apple TV box features a dedicated App Store. $99 + 99c apps disrupts casual console space despite lack of an official dedicated controller being a major gripe and a missed opportunity. Nintendo tanks financially as Wii U's gimmicky/middle of the road strategy fails to appeal to core or casual gamers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You know what? Whatever. They want to build things based on rumors and what people tell them they want, it's their funeral.
Hey, Apple is releasing an xMac, too.
Hey, Apple is building a car.
Hey, Apple is making an iPhone nano.
Boom. There goes the company.
Them be fightin words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
1, 2, and 3: Not in the slightest.
Look, we're gonna get one. It's gonna be completely redone. And it's gonna be great. But there won't be any FireWire ports, there won't be any optical drives, and there could very well be no internal PCIe expansion. Just a single, double-wide 16x PCIe 3.0 slot for the graphics card. But it will be great.
75% of the existing Mac Pro userbase will whine about it, saying it's the end. The other quarter will immediately buy it and instantly be on the forefront of professional computing across any platform. Half of the 75% will eventually buy it once they see reviews and how well it works where it does, since no other computers from anyone else will be close. A quarter of the 75% will keep their current Mac Pro until it dies, all the while whining on forums about how they refuse to change and how Apple needs to meet their archaic needs. The final quarter will immediately move away from Apple entirely, and half of them will regret it once they see reviews and how poorly the crap from everyone else works.
That's a lot of fractions.
You view things in such a silly manner at times. It's very simple. You look at what is available when combining options from Apple and whatever third parties to see if and how your needs can be met. Either you will or will not have a workable solution there. One thing is that an NVidia gpu option is a necessity. It's a soft requirement for certain markets that have historically purchased the mac pro. I disagree with your analogy on keeping things until they die, or at least the reasoning. If their needs aren't really growing, it doesn't matter, and they were unlikely candidates for a new purchase. I don't personally adhere to a strict upgrade schedule. It just comes down to what I have relative to what I require. I also disagree that everything else performs poorly. Real world testing is not in your favor. When it comes to workstation apps, it's hit and miss. Some things run faster on OSX. It's usually those with large linux followings. Others evaluate faster on Windows. There's no need to insert tribalism into computer purchases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
[...]
1, 2, and 3: Not in the slightest.
Look, we're gonna get one. It's gonna be completely redone. And it's gonna be great. But there won't be any FireWire ports, there won't be any optical drives, and there could very well be no internal PCIe expansion. Just a single, double-wide 16x PCIe 3.0 slot for the graphics card. But it will be great.
75% of the existing Mac Pro userbase will whine about it, saying it's the end. The other quarter will immediately buy it and instantly be on the forefront of professional computing across any platform. Half of the 75% will eventually buy it once they see reviews and how well it works where it does, since no other computers from anyone else will be close. A quarter of the 75% will keep their current Mac Pro until it dies, all the while whining on forums about how they refuse to change and how Apple needs to meet their archaic needs. The final quarter will immediately move away from Apple entirely, and half of them will regret it once they see reviews and how poorly the crap from everyone else works.
That's a lot of fractions.
I'll put it clearer just in case it wasn't understood:
1- New Mac Pro with cube form factor
2- New Mac Pro with cube form factor
3- New Mac Pro with cube form factor
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Ours, since that's the price needed for Apple to have its margins.
It's also why I don't figure this is ever happening.
ever compare the cheapest iPhone in price with the cheapest Android . Off contract of course. Listen up - there are 30M millionaires in the US, and you don't have to be a millionaire to afford 1-2K, if that were so capitalism would collapse. There is plenty of market in the US and around the world.
I've found references at least as far back as 2008, so 5 years is probably about right.
The interesting thing is that Munster is the one who keeps bringing up the Apple television. He did it in 2009, 2011, and now 2012:
http://www.reghardware.com/2011/10/24/apple_television_rumor/
Yes, I think Siri could significantly change TV. The technical problems seem especially challenging, though. Background noise would be a major problem since you're sitting 10 feet or so from the TV and there are other sounds (including the TV itself, of course). While it might not be too difficult to filter out the TV's sound, you'd need a good microphone and great noise filtering software.
That's exactly what many people fail to understand. Apple doesn't need to make cheap devices. The market for premium devices is huge.
Getting into cheaper devices would, of course, expand the market, but would reduce margins and profitability. It would damage the brand, possibly costing them some of the premium sales. And they'd have to cut corners in some places and offer products that are not as great as their existing products.
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
1) No one buys small TVs anymore
2) Even if they wanted such a thing, they'd probably use a computer instead of buying a TV
3) Only fools watch TV in bed (it's actually a very small section of the market)
4) It's not just about "thin and elegant" it's about "simple" (which almost no TVs are at the moment).
1) Lies
2) Lies
3) Lies
4) Doesn't have to be the TV that does it.
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Actually, Tesla uses Android…
And that bothers me to no end.
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
For some people, and for some movies, yes.
Until I don't have to wear glasses to view the content, it will be useless.
Originally Posted by Ireland
Yeah, because don't you just know Jony Ive just LOVES his dangly boxes and Samsung TV setup.
He released the Apple TV. I have physical proof that your sarcasm is meaningless.
You shouldn't need multiple devices.
You don't. You need a TV and one device. The Apple TV. Period. Swap out the stupid screen any time you want. Want it bigger, get it bigger. Want it in LCD or plasma? Get it in LCD or plasma. Get it in OLED, even. But your UI and ecosystem remains the same. Not that hard to get.
People should be able to pop the TV out of the box, enter their Apple ID and be off to the races. Boom!
Sounds exactly like the experience of anyone who has ever owned an Apple TV already.
The writing is on the wall, it's only a matter of time, they're going to make a TV not for rumors, but because that market is ripe for genuine revolution…
It is, absolutely. But not from a stupid, marginless panel.
Sooner I later you'll have to open your eyes to all of this.
Heard that about the iPhone nano and the xMac, too.
Seems that the things that "Apple has to do" are the things that it should be avoiding the most.
Originally Posted by hentaiboy
"TV turn on"
"TV what's on tonight?"
"TV change to Channel x"
"TV switch to Blu-ray"
"TV record xxx while I'm out"
"TV turn off"
"Sorry, I can't hear you over the content. Because TV has sound, too."
Originally Posted by Prima Kingu
…so what could be the iPad Mini Retina's resolution
2048x1536. They aren't going to magically change the ratio.
Originally Posted by herbapou
1. Apple need to break its predictable product launch patterns.
2. The Big, the Small and the Ugly: 4.5"+ iPhone 6, 4" iPhone 6 and a low cost emerging markets iOS phone.
3. Much lighter regular ipad, retina ipad mini at 329$ and non retina iPad mini at 249$ or even 199$.
4. 799 and 999 macbook airs.
5. Apple TV set and cable box with full cable partnership.
1. Really? When's the new Mac Pro coming out? How about the new iPhone? The new iPad? CHECK.
2. They already have that without silly sizes. CHECK.
3. I can't understand why anyone would want a non-retina device of anything, but this is obviously going to happen. WILLCHECK.
4. They don't need to.
5. Sure hope so.
Originally Posted by hmm
I disagree with your analogy on keeping things until they die, or at least the reasoning. If their needs aren't really growing, it doesn't matter, and they were unlikely candidates for a new purchase.
What do you mean, "unlikely candidates"? They WERE going to buy what is new if it was exactly the same, it wasn't, and so they didn't. That's how the pro world operates: Whine about everything that changes in the slightest from what they already know. Or at least it's what they'd have you believe. Which is why it's only a fraction of my projection.
Originally Posted by asdasd
ever compare the cheapest iPhone in price with the cheapest Android . Off contract of course. Listen up - there are 30M millionaires in the US, and you don't have to be a millionaire to afford 1-2K, if that were so capitalism would collapse. There is plenty of market in the US and around the world.
I don't get it; what's your point? As many people can afford a forced-data iPhone plan as cannot. The phone is meaningless.
I said iPhone and iPad mini not iphone and iPod touch. And I said design, not aspect ratio. And I agree with everything else you said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What do you mean, "unlikely candidates"? They WERE going to buy what is new if it was exactly the same, it wasn't, and so they didn't. That's how the pro world operates: Whine about everything that changes in the slightest from what they already know. Or at least it's what they'd have you believe. Which is why it's only a fraction of my projection.
People say a lot of things. It doesn't mean they'll actually buy it. They just think they will buy it. If they absolutely needed a new machine, they would have bought one when it became clear that Apple would not update the line for a while.
I see it as coming down to growth. If they're looking to leverage desktop users from older mac pros or windows users, the important parts are modernized storage, OpenCL/CUDA options, and cpu options. I think ignoring good gpu choices alone would be enough to kill any future viability for the platform. Thunderbolt wouldn't be a bad thing, but it's hardly necessary here. If they had a better way to route it than embedded graphics, that would work. I don't see embedded graphics as a good mac pro solution, as you can't really push them any higher than the latest imac. I don't think embedded solutions really exist with the 200W cards Apple has been using, and doing anything involving a lot of custom engineering seems out of focus for one of their lowest volume product lines. What do you think would attract people to an update at this point?
Marvin showed me this link a few days ago. While you can see the option without CUDA support took way longer than any of the others, this is partially because it's not well optimized to run on the cpu. The huge point of performance growth in a lot of these areas is pushing gpu based solutions. Now if you look at the smaller bars in context with each other, you still have an incredible difference between the 650m and the GTX580. One of the remaining issues is memory. Unless you have a Tesla in there, there's a large range of problems that aren't solvable in this manner. That won't change by next year, but it's an important factor for the health of the platform if it relies on being a workstation, given that this would be a strong use case. Some of the benchmarking tests run on anything, but if you're talking about multiple 4k seamless texture maps to a variety of attributes, you can just hose the available ram on these lighter video cards. I mention this because CUDA and OpenCL represent the best cost to performance ratio at the moment when it comes to computing gains if they can be leveraged.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You know what? Whatever. They want to build things based on rumors and what people tell them they want, it's their funeral.
Hey, Apple is releasing an xMac, too.
Hey, Apple is building a car.
Hey, Apple is making an iPhone nano.
Boom. There goes the company.
Some sort of desktop Mac positioned between the iMac and the Mac Pro is the only product I want from Apple. I do not want an all in one but I don't need the overkill of the Mac Pro. Apple has nothing for the user that needs more than the mobile components mini and the Mac Pro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
I agree but how does one monetize content management?
You monetize content management by selling Apple HDTVs used to manage content.
As I have said on another post it will probably be up to $150, but that would mean it to be a iPod without a screen and battery, with other ports, were also talking about $50 less to build the iPod touch 4 with they could do A5X dual core(graphics better for a tv). Plus minor improvement in speed. Cheaper materials and no need for as small so let's see here.
$70 off a Apple TV vs a iPod touch 4, Ot would estimate $30 more but in a year that could half.
But the MacBook Air design was supposed to be "the future". It is the most, absolutely most, beautiful laptop design in the world, ever. To me, and I'm sure to many. The MacBook Pro Retinas seem a little... compromised. Their hardware and screens are off-the-charts amazing, but imagine that in the MacBook Air form factor... need not be as thin, but that sliver/wedge/triangle style... Absolutely perfect.
The MacBook Pro 15" Retina should have been more of a MacBook Air 15". In fact, the Airs should have replaced most of the MacBook Pro models this year, or at least the MacBook Pros should have become very, very much more Air-shaped.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sr2012
But the MacBook Air design was supposed to be "the future".
That is taking a figurative statement out of context.
Take the design direction of the latest iMac, thinned down to a few millimeters at the edges… remove the computer components warranting the extra depth in the back and the frontside 'chin' (which is also missing from the Apple Display)… What we end up with is a 16:9, millimeters-thick 'slab', 42" ~ 60" in size. That's what I imagine an Apple iScreen (or whatever they call their television) will look like.
Rather like a giant 'widescreen' iPad on a stand. Or wall mounted.
Probably the biggest challenge will be keeping the frame strong enough, but the lamination technique used for the new iMac display apparently adds quite a bit of tensile strength to the structure...
ThIs assumes there will be a television at all. I'm still not 100% convinced… only, 90%-ish...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Take the design direction of the latest iMac, thinned down to a few millimeters at the edges… remove the computer components warranting the extra depth in the back and the frontside 'chin' (which is also missing from the Apple Display)… What we end up with is a 16:9, millimeters-thick 'slab', 42" ~ 60" in size. That's what I imagine an Apple iScreen (or whatever they call their television) will look like.
...
Most digital television sets, including all smart TVs, are dedicated all-in-one computers with integrated tuners. Several manufacturers, including Sony and Samsung, base their sets on embedded versions of Linux. [The GPL license is included in the owners documents.] Apple will not use Linux because its iOS is Unix behind the scenes. If Apple introduces its own HDTV, then you can expect it to be an enhanced AppleTV with integrated display. The extent to which it is enhanced is the subject of some speculation. In the USA, the Apple HDTV will include a ClearQAM, and [legally required] ATSC tuners. Because so many cable providers and many power-power broadcasters transmit analog signals, there is a small demand for NTSC for the foreseeable future. It is anyone's guess whether the Apple HDTV will include an NTSC tuner. Each international model will be localized to conform with the national laws of the country in which it is sold.
As for physical dimensions, we can expect each Apple HDTV to be comparable in size but slightly thinner than smart TVs of comparable screen size for other manufacturers. There is no reason to even think of the iMac because [most] Apple HDTVs will have substantially larger displays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
There's already a network app called Hulu. Why would I pay $.99 a show when for $7.99 a month I can watch shows from ABC/NBC/Fox and a multitude of other networks?
No ads?
philip