Email from Steve Jobs reveals Apple TV 'magic wand,' other future product ideas

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 112
    This lawsuit is a terrific way for Samsung to mine Apple's executive memos for new product ideas.

    Coming soon: The Samsung Galaxy Wand.
    They don't know what it does yet, but it will have the more cores and memory than any competing wand. Because that's all that matters in wands.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 112
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    andysol wrote: »
    I really don't think it's embarrassing. This type of correspondence is happening at all companies in every industry. I enjoyed reading it and id love to see googles and microsofts just for fun. Anyone with half a brain will realize that. The other half uses android, so who really cares what they think anyway.
    At the bottom of each page is this: Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only. I wonder who leaked this then? For me it's not the contents that are embarrassing but the fact it was made public. These things are labeled as confidential for a reason.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 112
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    This lawsuit is a terrific way for Samsung to mine Apple's executive memos for new product ideas.



    Coming soon: The Samsung Galaxy Wand.

    They don't know what it does yet, but it will have the more cores and memory than any competing wand. Because that's all that matters in wands.

    the $2B loss over this "patent"case looks like a better and better deal every day. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 112
    Marvin wrote: »
    - TV subscription, app, browser, magic wand?

    After 4 years, they still haven't done any of this. I guess this is one of those areas where they won't do it until they can do it right. Getting the controls right from the sofa is key to most of this. Subscriptions and other content is down to the providers.

    I don't know what I was expecting, but I always imagined Steve Jobs' secret list to be more imaginative and inspiring. Guess even Willy Wonka has to put his pants on one leg at a time.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 112
    snova wrote: »
    the $2B loss over this "patent"case looks like a better and better deal every day. 

    Don't worry.

    Anandtech will make sure people focus on the megahertz race in wands. How else does one measure a product? It's design and quality?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 112
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    rogifan wrote: »
    At the bottom of each page is this: Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only. I wonder who leaked this then? For me it's not the contents that are embarrassing but the fact it was made public. These things are labeled as confidential for a reason.

    Apple needs to get the attorneys who leaked this disbarred.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 112
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    It already exists.

    400

    Heh.
    LG already has a "magic wand" remote for its newest "smart TVs," and having used it, I find it incredibly annoying and gimmicky. They adopted a "desktop OS" metaphor for their TV OS, with the remote/wand as a kind of "air mouse."
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 112
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    - TV subscription, app, browser, magic wand?



    After 4 years, they still haven't done any of this. I guess this is one of those areas where they won't do it until they can do it right. Getting the controls right from the sofa is key to most of this. Subscriptions and other content is down to the providers.




    I don't know what I was expecting, but I always imagined Steve Jobs' secret list to be more imaginative and inspiring. Guess even Willy Wonka has to put his pants on one leg at a time.

    at least they had the sense to use some code names. They just did not take it far enough.  If they had all this would be gibberish. 

     

    I'd start with code names for competitors.

    i.e.

     

    DespicableMe  = Google

    Minion = Android

    Gru = Sergey Brin

    Kamino = Samsung

    BuyNLarge = Amazon

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 112
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Realistic View Post

     

    You still don't get it! Since Steve came back It never has been and hopefully never will be about the specs. It has been all about improving the performance and the end user experience which are not necessarily tied to hardware specs.


    How do you interpret this comment by Steve then, since he came back:

    "iPhone 4 with better antenna, processor, camera & software to stay ahead of competitors until mid 2012"

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.hipchat.com/9858/564763/EbGR9kXSYfwJJ2X/DX489 Rev 03-07-14.pdf

     

    It's not "about" the specs, it's about making technology accessible to everybody, but to enable that, you need a certain level of specs. It's powerful CPUs and GPUs that enable more intuitive interfaces. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 112
    irelandireland Posts: 17,802member
    TV SUBSCRIPTION!!!

    3 years later still hasn't happened. Shame, 'cause if they had an all-you-can-eat TV subscription option for Apple TV that would provide them an opportunity to sell a fully fledged hardware TV product down the line. Try this: TV subscription package $40 per month on Apple TV (really it should cost $30, but they charge $40 when subscribing through Apple TV), or $599 up front for their TV plus $60 per month on a two-year contract and you get the iTV product plus the TV package. This way what's actually happening is the Apple TV customers who opt for the TV package are actually getting penalised by $10 per month unbeknownst to themselves, and customers who opt for an iTV think they are getting the TV for $20 per month plus the initial iPad-priced $599 entry fee. They think they are getting the TV for $1,079 when really they are paying $1,319. My thinking here is for that price I reckon Apple could produce one awesome TV. And they still play the marketshare game by continuing to sell Apple TV.

    That's my thinking anyway.

    Besides, what happens eventually in 15 years time when virtually every TV on the planet in living rooms is a smart TV? Couldn't a couple of these TV guys offer features in their TVs that equal the Apple TV and negate the need for someone to add such a box onto their set? Wouldn't this eventually kill Apple TV no matter what it tried to do? Or what if the top two or three TV sellers eventually joined forces by offering a service like a TV package or shared App Store via a software update? The likes of Apple would be kicked outta the living room. This is a tricky future prospect in my opinion. Apple need to seriously cut some deals and forge out that TV subscription plan. It's the only way they'll every be able to sell an Apple-quality television that people will lust after at a price within their reach.

    Or what about a third option? Pay $99 for the TV plus $80 per month? Hmm... That'd three fine options to suit a lot of people. And in year three that monthly price could drop to $30 per month if you chose the iTV path? Business wise such a move would be sort of genius if I do say do myself. "You mean to say your iTV is only 2 years old and now your paying a smaller monthly fee for iTunes TV than I am for it on my Apple TV? That sucks! Yeah, I was thinking about getting an iTV myself anyway. No, seriously, I was."
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 112
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,284member

    Note: Jobs's description of the "Holy War with Google" was "all the ways we will compete with them" [emphasis added]. No mention of legal battles against them.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 112
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

    Note: Jobs's description of the "Holy War with Google" was "all the ways we will compete with them." No mention of legal battles against them.

     

    “BUT BUT BUT BUT NO! HOW WILL WE JUSTIFY SAYING ‘INNOVATE DON’T LITIGATE’ ANYMORE?!”

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 112
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,284member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    “BUT BUT BUT BUT NO! HOW WILL WE JUSTIFY SAYING ‘INNOVATE DON’T LITIGATE’ ANYMORE?!”


    QUIET! Samsung's got that all covered with their marketing budget.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 112
    dnd0psdnd0ps Posts: 253member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    It already exists.

    400
    Does it vibrate?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 112
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dnd0ps View Post



    Does it vibrate?

     

    You're in luck.

     

    Q: Does the PlayStation Move motion controller include vibration feedback?

    A: Yes. The PlayStation Move motion controller includes vibration feedback in the body of the controller.

     

    Source: http://blog.us.playstation.com/2010/09/07/playstation-move-the-ultimate-faq/

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 112
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member
    The "magic wand" is Amazons Fire remote. Unfortunately, it sucks.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 112
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    It already exists.

    400

    This one looks like an actual wand from Harry Potter.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 112
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    ascii wrote: »
    Wow, he was really across the details. And to those who think Apple doesn't care about specs, well they might not market that way, but he was interested in keeping up at least.

    That's what is meant when people say Apple doesn't care about specs. They don't add specs just to check something off a list. They add specs that make the device work better. If that happens to also put them well in front of the competition in terms of specs they will then market that spec because it's good for business but their business is making the device better, not simply adding it so they can say it's better. That's all the difference in the world.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 112
    thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    ireland wrote: »
    TV SUBSCRIPTION!!!

    3 years later still hasn't happened. Shame, 'cause if they had an all-you-can-eat TV subscription option for Apple TV that would provide them an opportunity to sell a fully fledged hardware TV product down the line. Try this: TV subscription package $40 per month on Apple TV (really it should cost $30, but they charge $40 when subscribing through Apple TV), or $599 up front for their TV plus $60 per month on a two-year contract and you get the iTV product plus the TV package. This way what's actually happening is the Apple TV customers who opt for the TV package are actually getting penalised by $10 per month unbeknownst to themselves, and customers who opt for an iTV think they are getting the TV for $20 per month plus the initial iPad-priced $599 entry fee. They think they are getting the TV for $1,079 when really they are paying $1,319. My thinking here is for that price I reckon Apple could produce one awesome TV. And they still play the marketshare game by continuing to sell Apple TV.

    That's my thinking anyway.

    Besides, what happens eventually in 15 years time when virtually every TV on the planet in living rooms is a smart TV? Couldn't a couple of these TV guys offer features in their TVs that equal the Apple TV and negate the need for someone to add such a box onto their set? Wouldn't this eventually kill Apple TV no matter what it tried to do? Or what if the top two or three TV sellers eventually joined forces by offering a service like a TV package or shared App Store via a software update? The likes of Apple would be kicked outta the living room. This is a tricky future prospect in my opinion. Apple need to seriously cut some deals and forge out that TV subscription plan. It's the only way they'll every be able to sell an Apple-quality television that people will lust after at a price within their reach.

    Or what about a third option? Pay $99 for the TV plus $80 per month? Hmm... That'd three fine options to suit a lot of people. And in year three that monthly price could drop to $30 per month if you chose the iTV path? Business wise such a move would be sort of genius if I do say do myself. "You mean to say your iTV is only 2 years old and now your paying a smaller monthly fee for iTunes TV than I am for it on my Apple TV? That sucks! Yeah, I was thinking about getting an iTV myself anyway. No, seriously, I was."

    In 15 years I don't expect TVs to be anything more than a panel of glass or other material not more than a few millimeters thick. It may not even need a power cable, and almost surely will not have much more in the way of connnectivity than a wifi chip in it. The "smart" part of a TV viewing experience will come from assorted Internet Wifi devices that beam images to it.

    Most of my "vision" for the TV of the future is already in labs and/or working today in one small form or another, so 15 years out is a pretty conservative time span. As to every TV on the planet, that'll be a stretch and I'm sure will still see old CRTs in certain less-advantaged lands on this silly and unequal blue dot in the universe.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 112
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    Those presentations are to Jobs from the executives from director level up so he can shoot down ideas, like the cheap phone. And he did. Clearly. The TV idea was riddled with ? , unless they had a demo they wouldn't be anywhere on implementing it - it was for discussion. More importantly secret projects wouldn't be revealed here as the 100 directors wouldn't be disclosed on all future projects.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.