Why could it not be in a "10.11.1" beta or post-10.11 rollout software update?
Doable, sure, but do you think ElCap would come out before the new Apple TV? Wouldn’t Apple want to roll the thing out as quickly as possible to capitalize on the start of the fall season of TV?
And even if so, wouldn’t we have found references to it in the OS already? I’m just happy that you can AirPlay straight from anywhere in the OS in ElCap.
Why play into the PS4/XBox One territory if you don't have to?
Maybe because the new ? TV will also be a top notch video game console in addition to everything else we are wishing for here?
If it gets apps to run then it will likely get games too but I can see it being more suited to party games than console games. There was an article about the software revenue potential with consoles:
but this is based on games that sell for $40-60 each. According to VGChartz, there are 24m PS4, 13m XBOne, 10m WiiU, 86m PS3, 85m 360, 101m WiiU. That's 319m units. If each of those users bought 3 games at $40 in a year, that makes up over $35b revenue.
The revenue potential for software on the ?TV is much smaller. Games in the App Store can barely sustain $0.99. Over 90% of mobile revenue is from advertising or in-app purchase models.
People might be able to buy an IAP through the TV and click on an ad popup but not as easily as on a mobile device.
To maintain high selling prices for software, they need games like the following:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
These examples run on the same graphics engine, you can see in the second one where it cuts straight from film to the game. This engine has been ported to iOS:
so higher-end games could be ported over. The financial incentive has to be there for developers/publishers though. When you look at earnings for big publishers, they rely quite heavily on a few big franchises. Activision/Blizzard makes $1b per year from individual games. Call of Duty has made about $11b in 11 years. Word of Warcraft is ~$1b per year game. What console developers/publishers couldn't do is sell the game on consoles for $40-60 but put it out free on ?TV and hope that throwing an IAP or ad model in will give the same return.
They could change certain games to a new model. WoW and StarCraft could work on ?TV where they don't work on consoles if they have a certain controller:
[VIDEO]
That would give the console some gaming exclusivity. Apple has sold over 25 million ?TV units. If 5 million were interested in gaming then there's some revenue to be made by publishers and having interactive games to keep kids entertained would be a bonus. Young kids under 5 wouldn't engage much with a console but a touch/motion controller where they tap options or fly through a scene would keep them entertained.
One surprising game franchise that took off was Skylanders that links up with toy sales for kids ($3b revenue):
The gameplay at around 5 minutes in is quite basic - just moving and firing, which could be handled with basic inputs. Disney has a similar thing with Disney Infinity:
The physical toy purchases get imported into the game via hardware attachments to the consoles. Apple could perhaps have a wireless API that just connects to standalone hardware. A 3D sensor above it could detect object shapes.
This needs a lot of extra hardware vs the standard ?TV - an Apple developed controller, extra storage (32GB minimum) and a powerful chip with extra memory. They should be able to do this kind of basic console for $149-199 but in addition to the low-end box.
TV streaming seems to be quite popular on the consoles, although the numbers are based on quite limited surveys:
The TV boxes are only managing to erode their marketshare by being inexpensive. It wouldn't be fair to say that usage on consoles is dropping either. When market volume increases but usage is growing faster on other devices, it's not that use on consoles is falling. TVs having built-in streaming is another factor.
The winning strategy for the home entertainment space is to be the conduit for content. Microsoft explained this as part of their XBox naming:
One input device connected to the TV that does everything: gaming, TV, DVR.
It takes time to change viewing habits so Apple's approach so far is fine. The biggest thing they could do to boost sales volume would be to expand international support. Only 1/3 of their main product sales are in the US. Apps would help international providers push video channels out. If they had an aggregate billing model that they took a small percentage of then channel providers could make money that way while keeping costs manageable by the user. This could be a huge deal for family entertainment because say there was a company in Australia that made kids TV shows, how would they get content to US or European families? A TV store that offers international channels would let a US family subscribe to that channel and suddenly content providers can compete internationally without the hurdle of local vendor lock-in.
If they can manage to get higher-end gaming in then that would be a plus but I don't think the revenue model is there. I think the low-investment casual games that are monetized by ads and IAPs will be how they go and even this depends on the controller.
In some way it's funny. Way back, when you hooked up your first consoles to your TV set, and could enjoy playing Pong, MoonPatrol, and all the other games, input was rudimentary, but gameplay totally fun. Now, we worry about how to control games that are overwhelming with graphics, options and complexity. And while I really think having these options is great, I do wonder, how much thought is put into the gameplay. "Quantity"(in terms of SFX etc.) over Quality, comes to mind. And when I look at my favorite games, that it the ones I just enjoy playing time after time, none of them are such graphics and control intense. OTOH, I never was much into most of what one kind find in the top charts now.
Having said that, I do not favor an island solution for a small subset of games on ATV that would work with today's input tech, such as mirroring the screen and remote controlling through iPhone, but there should be a consistent controller, that works well with any app out there.
A $400 Apple TV would be the end of the device. It's not hardware but rather content that matters. Under $100, apps and better content.
Concur. It makes little sense for ATV to be priced at about what a mac mini goes for.
Fairly, I think the new ATV is going to be something quite different from existing devices. I expect very deep integration with existing devices, including OSX macs, all the iDevices, and AW. It will all just work.
Concur. It makes little sense for ATV to be priced at about what a mac mini goes for.
Fairly, I think the new ATV is going to be something quite different from existing devices. I expect very deep integration with existing devices, including OSX macs, all the iDevices, and AW. It will all just work.
It will basically be an iPhone 6. Apple do care about margins and it won't be cheap. They might rename it so people don't think it's the same
They don't release new versions on a predictable schedule and have to make ten million of them before the announcement. Leaks have a higher probability when a very hyped product like iPhone gets updated like clockwork, and manufactured in insane numbers.
Actually what is really happening is that Apple is allowing the phone stuff to leak out, why, because it makes no sense to not to. It is not like people are not expecting it. Having information about the phones leak out actually helps Apple, because it keeps people from buying a competitor product when they know what Apple is about to do. No prototype of any product leaks out other than the phones. The phone leaks has actually hurt Samsung over the last two years just look at their numbers.
To your point I would image Apple is building inventory of the ATV, I do not think they will announce it like the watch and make people wait 6 months to get it. Also, even with Apple making people wait 6 months for the watch we did not see pieces of it show up prior to their release. Apple maintains a tight control over their supply chain so any leak in my mind are on purpose, or more or less someone decide not to watch too closely.
Actually what is really happening is that Apple is allowing the phone stuff to leak out, why, because it makes no sense to not to. It is not like people are not expecting it. Having information about the phones leak out actually helps Apple, because it keeps people from buying a competitor product when they know what Apple is about to do. No prototype of any product leaks out other than the phones. The phone leaks has actually hurt Samsung over the last two years just look at their numbers.
To your point I would image Apple is building inventory of the ATV, I do not think they will announce it like the watch and make people wait 6 months to get it. Also, even with Apple making people wait 6 months for the watch we did not see pieces of it show up prior to their release. Apple maintains a tight control over their supply chain so any leak in my mind are on purpose, or more or less someone decide not to watch too closely.
I don't think allows any of these leaks. Any leak just ruins the reveal.
We could get the new Apple TV in October without any leaks months ahead of time for a variety of reasons, but first we need to understand what allows a leak to happen in the first place.
For example, imagine you are buying someone a ring. Easy to conceal. Now imagine you're buying someone a 70" 4K TV. Not so easy to conceal. The former you can do without any assistance but the latter you may need help in getting the person out of the house and help in setting up.
I can see different Apple products in a similar way. Apple doesn't have to make 50(?) million Apple TVs for the launch. Even if the box is a larger size, the volume for all they need to store for launch is considerably smaller in total volume… and smaller is easier to conceal, as well as easier for someone to not notice.
Then you have the lead time the iPhone will need to start production rolling compared an Apple TV. This isn't just about the number of units being made, but the complexity of the build, which I'd argue is considerably more complex for the iPhone in terms of materials and number of parts. There woilr also be more costly QA for the iPhone due to everything mentioned above which can further slow things down when could also lead to leaks appearing earlier.
And that doesn't include any of the other aspects of the domino effect, like having to finalize a design sooner and start getting demos made, which could include getting new manufacturing plants, for such a massive and growing product line, as well as new machinery Apple has designed or had made to some unique quality to their iPhone that just isn't a likely consideration on their Apple TV. Even the A-series chip in the Apple TV isn't going to be recvoltuonary even if it is no longer a chip with a disabled core that wasn't suitable for an iDevice.
I don't think allows any of these leaks. Any leak just ruins the reveal.
We could get the new Apple TV in October without any leaks months ahead of time for a variety of reasons, but first we need to understand what allows a leak to happen in the first place.
For example, imagine you are buying someone a ring. Easy to conceal. Now imagine you're buying someone a 70" 4K TV. Not so easy to conceal. The former you can do without any assistance but the latter you may need help in getting the person out of the house and help in setting up.
I can see different Apple products in a similar way. Apple doesn't have to make 50(?) million Apple TVs for the launch. Even if the box is a larger size, the volume for all they need to store for launch is considerably smaller in total volume… and smaller is easier to conceal, as well as easier for someone to not notice.
Then you have the lead time the iPhone will need to start production rolling compared an Apple TV. This isn't just about the number of units being made, but the complexity of the build, which I'd argue is considerably more complex for the iPhone in terms of materials and number of parts. There woilr also be more costly QA for the iPhone due to everything mentioned above which can further slow things down when could also lead to leaks appearing earlier.
And that doesn't include any of the other aspects of the domino effect, like having to finalize a design sooner and start getting demos made, which could include getting new manufacturing plants, for such a massive and growing product line, as well as new machinery Apple has designed or had made to some unique quality to their iPhone that just isn't a likely consideration on their Apple TV. Even the A-series chip in the Apple TV isn't going to be recvoltuonary even if it is no longer a chip with a disabled core that wasn't suitable for an iDevice.
Will this upcoming event only be the new iPhones? Nothing else?
Will this upcoming event only be the new iPhones? Nothing else?
I would doubt it's only about the iPhone. I think the cure t Apple TV rumours seem valid and I think it would be a good time to announce and demo it. That said, you may have seen my succient¡ posts on what I hope the new Apple TV will be so I'm not sure how much of that is desire and what is objective thinking.
If not in the Sept. event then I'd say the Oct. event where the iPads and hopefully new Macs are discussed, but If I were a betting man I'd say it being unveiled next week with a launch this year, before Hallwoween.
I predict that Apple TV will be the new infotainment device. Content and media player is already done by just about everything out there. Majority of consumer would spend more than $99 on new content player since there are tons of sub $80 streamer.
However, none of them would provide some sort of easy to use interface such as Siri and then functionality like the Amazon Echo where it becomes your personal assistant that you can ask about the weather, news, or stocks and displays it on TV. Then adding home automation control capability with addons you got yourself a TV command center.
At $149-199 I can see such a device to be competitive with the landscape of smart devices out there. For just content playing or gaming, it's not price competitive at all when the Xbox 360 and PS3 costs only $150 or less that can do the same and $300 for PS4/XB1 that can do much much more.
Comments
Doable, sure, but do you think ElCap would come out before the new Apple TV? Wouldn’t Apple want to roll the thing out as quickly as possible to capitalize on the start of the fall season of TV?
And even if so, wouldn’t we have found references to it in the OS already? I’m just happy that you can AirPlay straight from anywhere in the OS in ElCap.
If it gets apps to run then it will likely get games too but I can see it being more suited to party games than console games. There was an article about the software revenue potential with consoles:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/03/23/new-apple-tv-with-app-store-would-enter-apple-into-35-billion-home-gaming-market
but this is based on games that sell for $40-60 each. According to VGChartz, there are 24m PS4, 13m XBOne, 10m WiiU, 86m PS3, 85m 360, 101m WiiU. That's 319m units. If each of those users bought 3 games at $40 in a year, that makes up over $35b revenue.
The revenue potential for software on the ?TV is much smaller. Games in the App Store can barely sustain $0.99. Over 90% of mobile revenue is from advertising or in-app purchase models.
People might be able to buy an IAP through the TV and click on an ad popup but not as easily as on a mobile device.
To maintain high selling prices for software, they need games like the following:
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
These examples run on the same graphics engine, you can see in the second one where it cuts straight from film to the game. This engine has been ported to iOS:
http://www.frostbite.com/2014/11/frostbite-tech-demo-battlefield-4-on-ios/
so higher-end games could be ported over. The financial incentive has to be there for developers/publishers though. When you look at earnings for big publishers, they rely quite heavily on a few big franchises. Activision/Blizzard makes $1b per year from individual games. Call of Duty has made about $11b in 11 years. Word of Warcraft is ~$1b per year game. What console developers/publishers couldn't do is sell the game on consoles for $40-60 but put it out free on ?TV and hope that throwing an IAP or ad model in will give the same return.
They could change certain games to a new model. WoW and StarCraft could work on ?TV where they don't work on consoles if they have a certain controller:
[VIDEO]
That would give the console some gaming exclusivity. Apple has sold over 25 million ?TV units. If 5 million were interested in gaming then there's some revenue to be made by publishers and having interactive games to keep kids entertained would be a bonus. Young kids under 5 wouldn't engage much with a console but a touch/motion controller where they tap options or fly through a scene would keep them entertained.
One surprising game franchise that took off was Skylanders that links up with toy sales for kids ($3b revenue):
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/skylanders-reaches-250-million-toys-sold-new-game-/1100-6427780/
[VIDEO]
The gameplay at around 5 minutes in is quite basic - just moving and firing, which could be handled with basic inputs. Disney has a similar thing with Disney Infinity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Infinity#Physical_elements
The physical toy purchases get imported into the game via hardware attachments to the consoles. Apple could perhaps have a wireless API that just connects to standalone hardware. A 3D sensor above it could detect object shapes.
This needs a lot of extra hardware vs the standard ?TV - an Apple developed controller, extra storage (32GB minimum) and a powerful chip with extra memory. They should be able to do this kind of basic console for $149-199 but in addition to the low-end box.
TV streaming seems to be quite popular on the consoles, although the numbers are based on quite limited surveys:
http://www.inquisitr.com/1521218/netflix-usage-drops-on-playstation-and-xbox/
The TV boxes are only managing to erode their marketshare by being inexpensive. It wouldn't be fair to say that usage on consoles is dropping either. When market volume increases but usage is growing faster on other devices, it's not that use on consoles is falling. TVs having built-in streaming is another factor.
The winning strategy for the home entertainment space is to be the conduit for content. Microsoft explained this as part of their XBox naming:
http://www.vg247.com/2013/05/28/xbox-one-microsoft-exec-explains-consoles-name/
One input device connected to the TV that does everything: gaming, TV, DVR.
It takes time to change viewing habits so Apple's approach so far is fine. The biggest thing they could do to boost sales volume would be to expand international support. Only 1/3 of their main product sales are in the US. Apps would help international providers push video channels out. If they had an aggregate billing model that they took a small percentage of then channel providers could make money that way while keeping costs manageable by the user. This could be a huge deal for family entertainment because say there was a company in Australia that made kids TV shows, how would they get content to US or European families? A TV store that offers international channels would let a US family subscribe to that channel and suddenly content providers can compete internationally without the hurdle of local vendor lock-in.
If they can manage to get higher-end gaming in then that would be a plus but I don't think the revenue model is there. I think the low-investment casual games that are monetized by ads and IAPs will be how they go and even this depends on the controller.
In some way it's funny. Way back, when you hooked up your first consoles to your TV set, and could enjoy playing Pong, MoonPatrol, and all the other games, input was rudimentary, but gameplay totally fun. Now, we worry about how to control games that are overwhelming with graphics, options and complexity. And while I really think having these options is great, I do wonder, how much thought is put into the gameplay. "Quantity"(in terms of SFX etc.) over Quality, comes to mind. And when I look at my favorite games, that it the ones I just enjoy playing time after time, none of them are such graphics and control intense. OTOH, I never was much into most of what one kind find in the top charts now.
Having said that, I do not favor an island solution for a small subset of games on ATV that would work with today's input tech, such as mirroring the screen and remote controlling through iPhone, but there should be a consistent controller, that works well with any app out there.
Here ya' go:
Whoosh!
Comes in your favorite color, as long as your favorite color is black anodized aluminum, silver anodized aluminum, or champagne anodized aluminum.
Also, Apple Car Edition in gold and rose gold. Price TBD.
nope.
but if it doesn't come with a remote it will limit non-iOS users from buying it. Why would Apple do that?
How about a non bundled device that can be purchased separately for those non-iOS users...
A $400 Apple TV would be the end of the device. It's not hardware but rather content that matters. Under $100, apps and better content.
Concur. It makes little sense for ATV to be priced at about what a mac mini goes for.
Fairly, I think the new ATV is going to be something quite different from existing devices. I expect very deep integration with existing devices, including OSX macs, all the iDevices, and AW. It will all just work.
It will basically be an iPhone 6. Apple do care about margins and it won't be cheap. They might rename it so people don't think it's the same
Oh that is nice!
They don't release new versions on a predictable schedule and have to make ten million of them before the announcement. Leaks have a higher probability when a very hyped product like iPhone gets updated like clockwork, and manufactured in insane numbers.
Actually what is really happening is that Apple is allowing the phone stuff to leak out, why, because it makes no sense to not to. It is not like people are not expecting it. Having information about the phones leak out actually helps Apple, because it keeps people from buying a competitor product when they know what Apple is about to do. No prototype of any product leaks out other than the phones. The phone leaks has actually hurt Samsung over the last two years just look at their numbers.
To your point I would image Apple is building inventory of the ATV, I do not think they will announce it like the watch and make people wait 6 months to get it. Also, even with Apple making people wait 6 months for the watch we did not see pieces of it show up prior to their release. Apple maintains a tight control over their supply chain so any leak in my mind are on purpose, or more or less someone decide not to watch too closely.
Also, even with Apple making people wait 6 months for the watch we did not see pieces of it show up prior to their release.
Incorrect.
EDIT: Link
I don't think allows any of these leaks. Any leak just ruins the reveal.
We could get the new Apple TV in October without any leaks months ahead of time for a variety of reasons, but first we need to understand what allows a leak to happen in the first place.
For example, imagine you are buying someone a ring. Easy to conceal. Now imagine you're buying someone a 70" 4K TV. Not so easy to conceal. The former you can do without any assistance but the latter you may need help in getting the person out of the house and help in setting up.
I can see different Apple products in a similar way. Apple doesn't have to make 50(?) million Apple TVs for the launch. Even if the box is a larger size, the volume for all they need to store for launch is considerably smaller in total volume… and smaller is easier to conceal, as well as easier for someone to not notice.
Then you have the lead time the iPhone will need to start production rolling compared an Apple TV. This isn't just about the number of units being made, but the complexity of the build, which I'd argue is considerably more complex for the iPhone in terms of materials and number of parts. There woilr also be more costly QA for the iPhone due to everything mentioned above which can further slow things down when could also lead to leaks appearing earlier.
And that doesn't include any of the other aspects of the domino effect, like having to finalize a design sooner and start getting demos made, which could include getting new manufacturing plants, for such a massive and growing product line, as well as new machinery Apple has designed or had made to some unique quality to their iPhone that just isn't a likely consideration on their Apple TV. Even the A-series chip in the Apple TV isn't going to be recvoltuonary even if it is no longer a chip with a disabled core that wasn't suitable for an iDevice.
I don't think allows any of these leaks. Any leak just ruins the reveal.
We could get the new Apple TV in October without any leaks months ahead of time for a variety of reasons, but first we need to understand what allows a leak to happen in the first place.
For example, imagine you are buying someone a ring. Easy to conceal. Now imagine you're buying someone a 70" 4K TV. Not so easy to conceal. The former you can do without any assistance but the latter you may need help in getting the person out of the house and help in setting up.
I can see different Apple products in a similar way. Apple doesn't have to make 50(?) million Apple TVs for the launch. Even if the box is a larger size, the volume for all they need to store for launch is considerably smaller in total volume… and smaller is easier to conceal, as well as easier for someone to not notice.
Then you have the lead time the iPhone will need to start production rolling compared an Apple TV. This isn't just about the number of units being made, but the complexity of the build, which I'd argue is considerably more complex for the iPhone in terms of materials and number of parts. There woilr also be more costly QA for the iPhone due to everything mentioned above which can further slow things down when could also lead to leaks appearing earlier.
And that doesn't include any of the other aspects of the domino effect, like having to finalize a design sooner and start getting demos made, which could include getting new manufacturing plants, for such a massive and growing product line, as well as new machinery Apple has designed or had made to some unique quality to their iPhone that just isn't a likely consideration on their Apple TV. Even the A-series chip in the Apple TV isn't going to be recvoltuonary even if it is no longer a chip with a disabled core that wasn't suitable for an iDevice.
Will this upcoming event only be the new iPhones? Nothing else?
I would doubt it's only about the iPhone. I think the cure t Apple TV rumours seem valid and I think it would be a good time to announce and demo it. That said, you may have seen my succient¡ posts on what I hope the new Apple TV will be so I'm not sure how much of that is desire and what is objective thinking.
If not in the Sept. event then I'd say the Oct. event where the iPads and hopefully new Macs are discussed, but If I were a betting man I'd say it being unveiled next week with a launch this year, before Hallwoween.
I predict that Apple TV will be the new infotainment device. Content and media player is already done by just about everything out there. Majority of consumer would spend more than $99 on new content player since there are tons of sub $80 streamer.
However, none of them would provide some sort of easy to use interface such as Siri and then functionality like the Amazon Echo where it becomes your personal assistant that you can ask about the weather, news, or stocks and displays it on TV. Then adding home automation control capability with addons you got yourself a TV command center.
At $149-199 I can see such a device to be competitive with the landscape of smart devices out there. For just content playing or gaming, it's not price competitive at all when the Xbox 360 and PS3 costs only $150 or less that can do the same and $300 for PS4/XB1 that can do much much more.