It looks like it is from 10 years ago so could be a legit concept from back then. For a little while some manufacturers were toying around with 60" screens. Would make no sense today when 75" form factor has / is dominating larger screens.
Well at least we don't have any of the "Steve said he wouldn't build a 75-inch, so shut up" folks here today.
The idea of a me-too Apple TV is pretty much a non-starter for several reasons. But, let's say Apple could design a flexible, roll up screen that retracts back into an Apple-branded black - white - rose gold cylinder...remember, those Apple flexible screen patents don't say what size the screen is.
I zoomed into the picture and commented a bit. I'm calling this picture bogus.jpg
We did the same thing. The biggest problem with that is there are other similar artifacts in other areas, as well as what appear to be artifacts generated by a CCD taking a picture of a television.
We don't think it's Apple's. However, when we spot stuff like this, we have an obligation to say that we have significant doubts, as more mainstream outlets pick up breathless reports about things like this.
I have as much trouble with the article as i do the pictures! The article implies that Apple has no need nor desire to build a 60" TV or monitor. Apple may have lost its way with respect to the Pro market but if they are serious about historical strengths then they would be interested in a large screen display.
In otherwords the tone of the article isnt doing AI any favors. It is silly to imply that you (AI) know where Apple is going with new products. This especially when Apple has implied that they will reneter a market.
Oh yeah? Where does it say any of your assumptions? You're painting your own wants and needs over the article's words -- that don't say anything even close to what you're assuming.
Words have meaning. If I wanted to say that Apple would be idiotic for doing so, I'd say specifically that. What "historical strengths" suggest to you that they are interested in their own, branded, large screen display?
Why does it always have to be a blurry image? Doesn't anyone know how to snap a damn photo anymore? Even if you're holding your phone in a way so someone can't necessarily see you're taking a photo of something you can still make it not blurry. I think most of these are someone taking a photo, modifying it and then blurring it because they can't modify the photo without someone noticing.
These photos were originally posted in less blurry form, deleted, then reposted as blurry. Possibly to make them seem more "legit" — so I'm highly skeptical of these now. All of this including the original non-blurries are in the comments on MR.
While I don't think that Apple is going to the consumer market with these, it would be an easy thing to have a limited production run of a television/monitor specifically for installation in Apple facilities worldwide, and even possibly within Apple Retail. They could have Foxconn knock out 3000 to 5000 of these at at mere few millions of dollars over off the shelf stuff.
Why would Apple want that?
Because consumer televisions generally suck for enterprise use, and Apple would want to have absolute control of security, IoT begin particularly bad in most consumer devices. Maybe there would even be a market for Apple designed, large screen, 5k-8K TB 3 monitors once the new Mac Pro's arrive.
In this day and age when even the cheapest smartphones have decent cameras and better ones have excellent cameras, I just assume a blurry 'prototype/sneak product pic is fake until proven otherwise.
Yes, people with good phone cameras can still manage to take bad pics, but anybody with some access to these situations should be more than capable of taking video, especially at 120/240fps or burst shots and get one good pic.
There might be exigent circumstances, such as hearing Tim Cook over the PA shouting 'Let slip the dogs of war!' Or something more mundane like 'Release the hounds!' but I give Tim credit for a little more panache, though I think he'd feel 'Cry havoc' bit over the top.
I zoomed into the picture and commented a bit. I'm calling this picture bogus.jpg
We did the same thing. The biggest problem with that is there are other similar artifacts in other areas, as well as what appear to be artifacts generated by a CCD taking a picture of a television.
We don't think it's Apple's. However, when we spot stuff like this, we have an obligation to say that we have significant doubts, as more mainstream outlets pick up breathless reports about things like this.
I have as much trouble with the article as i do the pictures! The article implies that Apple has no need nor desire to build a 60" TV or monitor. Apple may have lost its way with respect to the Pro market but if they are serious about historical strengths then they would be interested in a large screen display.
In otherwords the tone of the article isnt doing AI any favors. It is silly to imply that you (AI) know where Apple is going with new products. This especially when Apple has implied that they will reneter a market.
Oh yeah? Where does it say any of your assumptions? You're painting your own wants and needs over the article's words -- that don't say anything even close to what you're assuming.
Words have meaning. If I wanted to say that Apple would be idiotic for doing so, I'd say specifically that. What "historical strengths" suggest to you that they are interested in their own, branded, large screen display?
Dude, you guys need to chill when it comes to comments. There will always be negative comments and you're going to go insane if you take them all to heart.
Besides, after YEARS of folks on this forum proclaiming an Apple Plasma TV would appear the next major conference anyone that proclaims there's some major advantage for Apple to do so in 2017 is smoking something that may or may not be legal in their state.
I still firmly think Jobs' solution to the TV problem is owning their own original content and after Pixar he had the chops to take on the TV studios by building a stellar team. Hopefully Tim has done so as well...and given a billion dollar investment those guys have no resource issues or excuses.
Except for the big handwritten "OLED 3" lettering on the back. Also this is the original unblurred image:
Well… that does it, then. Right? It’s obviously fake because a purposely edited blurry picture was passed off as the only image when we had a crisp one to begin with. But now that we can actually see the design, it’s a shame it’s fake.
I zoomed into the picture and commented a bit. I'm calling this picture bogus.jpg
We did the same thing. The biggest problem with that is there are other similar artifacts in other areas, as well as what appear to be artifacts generated by a CCD taking a picture of a television.
We don't think it's Apple's. However, when we spot stuff like this, we have an obligation to say that we have significant doubts, as more mainstream outlets pick up breathless reports about things like this.
I have as much trouble with the article as i do the pictures! The article implies that Apple has no need nor desire to build a 60" TV or monitor. Apple may have lost its way with respect to the Pro market but if they are serious about historical strengths then they would be interested in a large screen display.
In otherwords the tone of the article isnt doing AI any favors. It is silly to imply that you (AI) know where Apple is going with new products. This especially when Apple has implied that they will reneter a market.
Oh yeah? Where does it say any of your assumptions? You're painting your own wants and needs over the article's words -- that don't say anything even close to what you're assuming.
Words have meaning. If I wanted to say that Apple would be idiotic for doing so, I'd say specifically that. What "historical strengths" suggest to you that they are interested in their own, branded, large screen display?
Dude, you guys need to chill when it comes to comments. There will always be negative comments and you're going to go insane if you take them all to heart.
Besides, after YEARS of folks on this forum proclaiming an Apple Plasma TV would appear the next major conference anyone that proclaims there's some major advantage for Apple to do so in 2017 is smoking something that may or may not be legal in their state.
I still firmly think Jobs' solution to the TV problem is owning their own original content and after Pixar he had the chops to take on the TV studios by building a stellar team. Hopefully Tim has done so as well...and given a billion dollar investment those guys have no resource issues or excuses.
You'll find that most of the confrontations are either people who didn't read for understanding, or that willfully misinterpreted what was written. If I responded on every negative comment, I'd have more posts than even the most devout AI-goers.
Despite the publisher's claims, there is also nothing on the pictures suggesting that the device is OLED at all.
Except for the big handwritten "OLED 3" lettering on the back. Also this is the original unblurred image:
Thx, the original images from WeiBo were not blurry as well. So somehow these pictures ended up on Twitter buried....
I am still waiting to see the LG v30 to see if its OLED screen is any good. Otherwise the $2B investment on LG Display could be for large screen. Which LG is the only supplier and best at doing.
If Apple put its logo on prototypes, perhaps this would be a story. Since they don't it isn't.
Two electromagnetic compliance engineers chimed in on MR about this, and here's another unblurred photo:
Gaspode67 said:
No. Whatever that is it's on a wooden table for EMC testing. This is the standard setup for ALL electronic equipment & goods. You use a wooden table, as it is inert in an EMC test, and it is placed on a turntable so that you can scan for emissions or test for interference from all angles and heightsThere is a pneumatically controlled antenna at the other end of the chamber.
Yes, you are correct. The first three photos show the device inside the chambers for radiated emissions and radiated immunity testing. The final one looks to be conducted immunity testing. Whist you're correct that it is normal to have the unit fully badged & serial-numbered when going for the official certification & report, there's nothing to stop you doing multiple (even hundreds) of pre-compliance runs with various stages of prototyping/development/pre-production/etc.
If that logo is a piece of plastic built into the rear case, they would want to test with that in place as early as possible, as this would be one of the potential areas for EMC issues.
Bigsk8r said:
As an Electromagnetic Compliance Engineer myself, I can verify the validity of the statements made by Gaspode67 and Arran with regard to the testing.
Also - as Gaspode67 points out - given Apple's propensity for wanting to embed their metal products with plastic logos and openings (AKA... RF noise emitting apertures), it is hard to determine how close to "final" this product might be. Having said that though, as a person waiting for something better than the 24" LED Display he has now and did not see the extra 3" that were offered before as worthy of a $1000 investment, this does interest me and I hope it's a product that makes it out eventually.
There is also the possibility that this is another companies product with an Apple log skillfully photoshopped in.
So perhaps the logo is 'shopped in, but in this case it would make sense the logo is present for EMC testing. The fact they were later blurred and re-uploaded makes me think these are fakes, but who the hell knows.
Well… that does it, then. Right? It’s obviously fake because a purposely edited blurry picture was passed off as the only image when we had a crisp one to begin with. But now that we can actually see the design, it’s a shame it’s fake.
They are definitely making a standalone display as they said they are making another professional display. I'd expect the production model to be space grey and no bigger than 30" but it can be almost as thin as the edge of the iMac except for the power supply, which can go in an area like the square at the back.
These images look like something that was posted years ago but the shape is more TV-like than monitor. Apple would still need an Apple TV box component and this is best being external from the panel. If they integrated an Apple TV device into the mounting stand for the panel, the mount could be upgraded and they'd have wall-mount options. You just slide the panel onto it and off when you need a $150 box upgrade.
TVs can have a lot of cable clutter at the back so it would be best to have a way to get external ports away from the back of the TV so they don't have to put it on a hinge. This can be done with the power cable.
The TV market has long upgrade cycles and Apple would likely get no more than 5% (Sony level) of the TV market at a premium price point:
10m units yearly roughly at $1000-1500 = $10-15b revenue. This potential for unit sales is similar to Apple TV box sales but 10x the revenue and they can do it in addition to the box. The display would have selling points to set it apart from their competition: laminated glass anti-glare MicroLED, UHD, fast refresh, simple UI and remote, clean design, Homekit. TVs are really badly designed for the most part. This is what they're competing with (~$700):
$300-800 more for Apple's design including the Apple TV would be worthwhile. Some markets they don't want to be in but almost every Apple employee will own a TV and they have to go home to these every day and at some point deal with their configuration and use their remotes. Apple can make switching devices easier, the Apple TV UI can just have icons for each product e.g PS4, Cable box etc and you just select those to switch over. It would be by far the simplest TV to setup and use.
They are definitely making a standalone display as they said they are making another professional display.
Oh, they did?! I totally missed that. Thank heavens.
TVs are really badly designed for the most part.
Never mind their UIs! I've avoided the "smart TV" markup thus far because I refuse to use their garbage built-in software and thus wouldn't want to pay extra for it.
$300-800 more for Apple's design including the Apple TV would be worthwhile.
The only thing I'd say about the design we're seeing here is that it looks like audio quality is going to be sacrificed utterly on the altar of design. Maybe they'll tell people that they expect them to buy two HomePods or some third party surround sound system…
>TVs can have a lot of cable clutter at the back so it would be best to have a way to get external ports away from the back of the TV so they don't have to put it on a hinge. This can be done with the power cable.
The new OLED TV from LG already does that, as well as many other 4K TV in China. You basically have a special cable attached to the panel, and the rest of the electronics components, and power supply are in a separate box, in LG's case ( as well as Xioami ) it is also a speaker.
Sometimes I wonder if they can have the whole side frame of TV to act as a Wireless Router as well. That is massive surface area for Antenna.
There is also the problem with TV Tuner, US, Japan, China, EU all uses different TV Technology. May be apple have find a solution to that as well?
>TVs can have a lot of cable clutter at the back so it would be best to have a way to get external ports away from the back of the TV so they don't have to put it on a hinge. This can be done with the power cable.
The new OLED TV from LG already does that, as well as many other 4K TV in China. You basically have a special cable attached to the panel, and the rest of the electronics components, and power supply are in a separate box, in LG's case ( as well as Xioami ) it is also a speaker.
Sometimes I wonder if they can have the whole side frame of TV to act as a Wireless Router as well. That is massive surface area for Antenna.
There is also the problem with TV Tuner, US, Japan, China, EU all uses different TV Technology. May be apple have find a solution to that as well?
The sony bravias 4K HDR have really good cable management built in the stand or wall bracket. If Apple are going to enter this space they really can't come in as the messy ones.
The more I think about it, the less need there is for a TV tuner. Apple wanted to go All IP for for a long time, with HEVC may be all Real time TV will be Streamed over the Internet to Apple TV users.
Comments
The idea of a me-too Apple TV is pretty much a non-starter for several reasons. But, let's say Apple could design a flexible, roll up screen that retracts back into an Apple-branded black - white - rose gold cylinder...remember, those Apple flexible screen patents don't say what size the screen is.
Or not.
I also reckon they won't think there's room.
While I don't think that Apple is going to the consumer market with these, it would be an easy thing to have a limited production run of a television/monitor specifically for installation in Apple facilities worldwide, and even possibly within Apple Retail. They could have Foxconn knock out 3000 to 5000 of these at at mere few millions of dollars over off the shelf stuff.
Why would Apple want that?
Because consumer televisions generally suck for enterprise use, and Apple would want to have absolute control of security, IoT begin particularly bad in most consumer devices. Maybe there would even be a market for Apple designed, large screen, 5k-8K TB 3 monitors once the new Mac Pro's arrive.
Yes, people with good phone cameras can still manage to take bad pics, but anybody with some access to these situations should be more than capable of taking video, especially at 120/240fps or burst shots and get one good pic.
There might be exigent circumstances, such as hearing Tim Cook over the PA shouting 'Let slip the dogs of war!' Or something more mundane like 'Release the hounds!' but I give Tim credit for a little more panache, though I think he'd feel 'Cry havoc' bit over the top.
But seriously, blurry pics?
Besides, after YEARS of folks on this forum proclaiming an Apple Plasma TV would appear the next major conference anyone that proclaims there's some major advantage for Apple to do so in 2017 is smoking something that may or may not be legal in their state.
I still firmly think Jobs' solution to the TV problem is owning their own original content and after Pixar he had the chops to take on the TV studios by building a stellar team. Hopefully Tim has done so as well...and given a billion dollar investment those guys have no resource issues or excuses.
I am still waiting to see the LG v30 to see if its OLED screen is any good. Otherwise the $2B investment on LG Display could be for large screen. Which LG is the only supplier and best at doing.
Two electromagnetic compliance engineers chimed in on MR about this, and here's another unblurred photo:
iPad prototype with Apple logo: https://www.theiphonewiki.com/w/images/d/d8/Ipad-mini-prototype.jpg
iPhone prototype with Apple logo: http://gizmodo.com/5520155/gal-1/
iPod touch prototype with Apple logo: https://www.theiphonewiki.com/w/images/a/a0/IPod_Cam_01.jpg
MacBook Pro (with cellular data) prototype with Apple logo: https://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/08/IMG_20110814_232635.jpg
Not sure why you'd even say that.
These images look like something that was posted years ago but the shape is more TV-like than monitor. Apple would still need an Apple TV box component and this is best being external from the panel. If they integrated an Apple TV device into the mounting stand for the panel, the mount could be upgraded and they'd have wall-mount options. You just slide the panel onto it and off when you need a $150 box upgrade.
TVs can have a lot of cable clutter at the back so it would be best to have a way to get external ports away from the back of the TV so they don't have to put it on a hinge. This can be done with the power cable.
The TV market has long upgrade cycles and Apple would likely get no more than 5% (Sony level) of the TV market at a premium price point:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/326947/lcd-sales-by-region/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/267095/global-market-share-of-lcd-tv-manufacturers/
10m units yearly roughly at $1000-1500 = $10-15b revenue. This potential for unit sales is similar to Apple TV box sales but 10x the revenue and they can do it in addition to the box. The display would have selling points to set it apart from their competition: laminated glass anti-glare MicroLED, UHD, fast refresh, simple UI and remote, clean design, Homekit. TVs are really badly designed for the most part. This is what they're competing with (~$700):
https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Electronics-UN55MU6300-55-Inch-Ultra/dp/B06XGJX3SH
$300-800 more for Apple's design including the Apple TV would be worthwhile. Some markets they don't want to be in but almost every Apple employee will own a TV and they have to go home to these every day and at some point deal with their configuration and use their remotes. Apple can make switching devices easier, the Apple TV UI can just have icons for each product e.g PS4, Cable box etc and you just select those to switch over. It would be by far the simplest TV to setup and use.
Never mind their UIs! I've avoided the "smart TV" markup thus far because I refuse to use their garbage built-in software and thus wouldn't want to pay extra for it.
The only thing I'd say about the design we're seeing here is that it looks like audio quality is going to be sacrificed utterly on the altar of design. Maybe they'll tell people that they expect them to buy two HomePods or some third party surround sound system…
The new OLED TV from LG already does that, as well as many other 4K TV in China. You basically have a special cable attached to the panel, and the rest of the electronics components, and power supply are in a separate box, in LG's case ( as well as Xioami ) it is also a speaker.
Sometimes I wonder if they can have the whole side frame of TV to act as a Wireless Router as well. That is massive surface area for Antenna.
There is also the problem with TV Tuner, US, Japan, China, EU all uses different TV Technology. May be apple have find a solution to that as well?