Mossberg: Apple working on cellphone, media hub

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
We all know how close Walt Mossberg and Steve Jobs are. In this article today Wednesday 11th of May by Mossberg titled "In Our Post-PC Era, Apple's Device Model Beats the PC Way" Mossberg said this: "Now, Apple is working on other projects built on the same end-to-end model as the iPod: a media-playing cellphone and a home-media hub." How much more info. do we need than this that the infamous iPhone is on its way? Why would he say this? Does this mean we should expect this thing soon? (or at least before the end of summer) Here's the link It's an interesting article, with the juicy part forth paragraph down ;-)





edit>In addition I just spotted this video on the article he just wrote )
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 104
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ireland

    We all know how close Walt Mossberg and Steve Jobs are. In this article today Wednesday 11th of May by Mossberg titled "In Our Post-PC Era, Apple's Device Model Beats the PC Way" Mossberg said this: "Now, Apple is working on other projects built on the same end-to-end model as the iPod: a media-playing cellphone and a home-media hub." How much more info. do we need than this that the infamous iPhone is on its way? Why would he say this? Does this mean we should expect this thing soon? (or at least before the end of summer) Here's the link It's an interesting article, with the juicy part forth paragraph down ;-)



    I dunno...I think he's just taking wild guesses.
  • Reply 2 of 104
    mr. dirkmr. dirk Posts: 187member
    Somehow, I doubt that Steve Jobs would even tell his mother what Apple's working on.
  • Reply 3 of 104
    irelandireland Posts: 17,737member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr. Dirk

    Somehow, I doubt that Steve Jobs would even tell his mother what Apple's working on.



    He wouldn't tell his mother, but he would tell Mossberg
  • Reply 4 of 104
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ireland

    He wouldn't tell his mother, but he would tell Mossberg



    Bingo.
  • Reply 5 of 104
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    If Mossberg is telling us about real future products that he is fully aware of it's because Steve Jobs wants them leaked. Just like the original iPod was leaked abut 5 days in advance. Steve wants big lines outside the Apple stores, and he wants the world to know about it.

    I just hope they are both sold at Ultimate Electronics stores like the iPod is because I have a lot of credit there, which is why I bought my last 3 iPods from there
  • Reply 6 of 104
    netdognetdog Posts: 244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ireland

    He wouldn't tell his mother, but he would tell Mossberg



    Actually yes. Anybody remember when the Intel machines were rolled out and Mossberg had already had them and had been using them heavily for more than a week? His review, one that came out upon their release, was a great help to Apple. It certainly influenced me as a switcher, and I was far from alone in that.



    Yes, Mossberg has a special relationship with Apple, and he would not have said this if it weren't true. He is not that sort of journo.



    FWIW, let's also grok that Walt is quoted and named in the new Mac TV spots. I think that is probably a first for a tech journo in a brand spot.
  • Reply 7 of 104
    k_munick_munic Posts: 357member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ireland

    ...Walt Mossberg ... a media-playing cellphone and a home-media hub." ...



    a basic principle of creativity is "upside down".. I'm still not convinced about an "Apple phone", watching the market from the very beginning, mobile's market is turning too fast... but I'm still very sure, it is easy to add "phone-abilty" to any other lifestyle device ... a Nano has a good size for a phone, adressbook allready included... the "electronics" for a mobile fit on a single chip... maybe two...



    same with "media-hub":

    a telly-hater as SJ will never ever say "one more thing for your plasmas: ?", but for sure will offer the "invisible computer" for your living room, HiDef tv recording optional
  • Reply 8 of 104
    mimacmimac Posts: 871member
    Steve Jobs may very well hate TV but it does make good business sense to give the customer what they want. Apple could blow away all the competition with a "Digital Media Centre" including all the bells and whistles. They have the name and the know how to create and successfully market a media hub for the living room - one which could meet all your HiDef play/record needs as well as computing/internet and music.



    The Mac platform is the perfect system to base such a device on with years of research/development and use in the video and music industries.



    "Make it and they will come".
  • Reply 9 of 104
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by k_munic

    ...a telly-hater as SJ will never ever say "one more thing for your plasmas: ?", but for sure will offer the "invisible computer" for your living room, HiDef tv recording optional



    A common misrepresentation on what Steve said a long time ago. I don't have the exact quote but it was something like "people turn their minds off when they watch the TV, and on when they use the computer" This was in reference to the convergence of the TV into the computer. I don't read this as "I hate TV" but more as a charaicterization that TV is a passive activity where using the computer is an active one. To that end I think that it is quite possible that Steve is working on a DV Media device, but we won't see the TV tuner integrated into an iMac. In fact the whole "Hub of your Digital Lifestyle" model that Apple came out with implies and almost demands DV integration into the Hub, but most people don't sit down to watch TV on their little computer monitors.



    Apple has had the technology to build these devices, as well as integrate TV's into the Mac. They already had them out on the market before Steve returned. What they have not had, and is just becoming available, is the wireless method of effeciently communicating between the computer and these devices without wires and compression methods that are of high enough quality to set up a network where the computer is the Hub of a myriad of different audia, video, and home control devices around the house. These are here today, Apple has the audio solution which has been on the market for a while now, which is only missing a remote control method for controlling the audio stream from the satelite location rather than the computer. They also have the audio content.



    They are working on the video content, but the resolution is not there and they still need to get movie studio's on board. When they have the content to deliver and appropriate contracts for price and delivery resolution then they will be ready to release the home satelite digital video device. They may not need the movie studios on board, as long as they have enough TV content available, for this, instead relying on tryign to reach critical mass market penetration to "Force" acceptance of their deliver model on the movie industry. However with Steve's new relationship with Disney I would expect that when all the peices of this puzzle are ready for prime time Apple will anounce the home media hub.



    As for phones, it would be a hard market to enter with a lot of competition on the hardware end and a lot of different network, standards to comply with, and service providers to make contracts with. I'm not saying it can't be done, the hardware probably isn't that difficult, the software probably a bit more difficult, but getting enough contracts with the cell phone service providers to have a large enough potential market for the device to sustain the research and development of a new product would probably be a very difficult challenge.
  • Reply 10 of 104
    netdognetdog Posts: 244member
    I think the above is quite well put. A 1080p stream only requires a maximum of 36Kb of throughput, meaning that 802.11g (Apple's Extreme) is more than capable of handling it. Needless to say, virtually any modern ethernet adapter would be left with tons of headroom, and at worst could even handle three simultaneous streams.
  • Reply 11 of 104
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by netdog

    I think the above is quite well put. A 1080p stream only requires a maximum of 36Kb of throughput, meaning that 802.11g (Apple's Extreme) is more than capable of handling it. Needless to say, virtually any modern ethernet adapter would be left with tons of headroom, and at worst could even handle three simultaneous streams.



    But for the average home you need to be able to effectively handle at least 2 simultaneous streams as well as other network traffic. Most families have at least 2 TV's, and the wise company would want one device on each TV with the potential to use both of them at the same time without adversly affecting the use of the computer for its intended purpose.
  • Reply 12 of 104
    netdognetdog Posts: 244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by @homenow

    But for the average home you need to be able to effectively handle at least 2 simultaneous streams as well as other network traffic. Most families have at least 2 TV's, and the wise company would want one device on each TV with the potential to use both of them at the same time without adversly affecting the use of the computer for its intended purpose.



    I could be wrong, but I expect that there will be a souped up and perhaps hardware-specific Mini-like cpu that will both warehouse the data and pass it on to the television locally, but no real burden on the home network or the user's primary PC(s).
  • Reply 13 of 104
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by netdog

    I could be wrong, but I expect that there will be a souped up and perhaps hardware-specific Mini-like cpu that will both warehouse the data and pass it on to the television locally, but no real burden on the home network or the user's primary PC(s).



    I'm often wrong, so take this with a grain of salt. I see a device whith highly initegrated hardware and software that is a specialized home media device. It may need some local storage for a file cache, OS, and other software, but that storage would not be the location of choice for the media library. My reasoning is that you want to come out with a device that has a low enough price point to attract multiple unit sales to each household. It would also be competing at least in some level with DVD's and PVR's for the consumers money, as well as new VIIV compliant devices. This dictates a certain price point for the device that while initialy being high would need to come down to the $100-$200 per unit range. You can achieve these goals a lot easier with embeded processors and specialized devices with limited storage a lot easier than with a more general computing device, just look a the cost of a DVD player today. That doesn't mean that it can't do more, it would probably need iCal integration, some way to browse the internet and read e-mail, possibly send remote commands to the computer for other things, automator or applescript integration? These are things that don't take a lot of raw power, and if the media device is acting more like a thin client than a general PC then there are a lot of things that it could do without the need for the raw processing speed, relying instead on the Hub and dedicated hardware audio/video decoders that can do the job faster and cheeper than a full blown general computing CPU.



    Given the modern multi-core CPU, multi-processing, multi-threaded OS's and the average home computer uses I don't see streaming a file to a remoter device as a major problem for a background task as long as the device is doing the decoding all the computer is doing is reading the file and routing that data to the proper network port.
  • Reply 14 of 104
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Well,



    Given the fact that I finally knuckled under and re-upped a 2 year Cingular two line family plan contract (and got 2 new SLVRs for only $29 bucks each - with BT headsets ta-boot) .... but only after holding out for almost a full year waiting to see what might happen with Apple .... I think its safe to assume that yes Apple WILL finally come out with their phone and probably soon since the ink on my new contract is just about dry by now.



    Dave
  • Reply 15 of 104
    k_munick_munic Posts: 357member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by @homenow

    A common misrepresentation on what Steve said a long time ago. ? it was something like "people turn their minds off when they watch the TV, and on when they use the computer" This was in reference to the convergence of the TV into the computer. I don't read this as "I hate TV" but more as a charaicterization that TV is a passive activity where using the computer is an active one. ?



    good point, that interpretation probably got lost in my translation



    what I do see actually existing:

    * Bluetooth/802.11g - wireless anything

    * Airport Extreme - plug and play at any powerplug

    * Rendevouz/Bonjour/Bonsoir... huzzle free networking

    * iPod/iTunes/iTMS - proofed concept of hard- and software integration

    * h264 - owning HiDef standards (? european HDTV, no idea of US)

    * iApps - proof of concept of easy to use, simplicity&convenience with highly complicated matter....



    as said above:

    the logical evolution from "computer in parts" to all-in-one (iMac = no computer visible) to ... is the "invisible" machine, pure app, on many screens, serving audio&video, you type on your wireless board, "somehow" the message goes into the net and comes out of it.... imagine some black "Cubes", distributed in your household, whereever you need it: at the end of the cable, there's the "inBox", at your Plasma there's the "vBox", at your printers there're "outBoxes", in the closet humms the "storeBox", in your jacket the "goBox" - Boom!done.... you're Mac is anywhere.-
  • Reply 16 of 104
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by k_munic

    what I do see actually existing:

    * Bluetooth/802.11g - wireless anything

    * Airport Extreme - plug and play at any powerplug

    * Rendevouz/Bonjour/Bonsoir... huzzle free networking

    * iPod/iTunes/iTMS - proofed concept of hard- and software integration

    * h264 - owning HiDef standards (? european HDTV, no idea of US)

    * iApps - proof of concept of easy to use, simplicity&convenience with highly complicated matter....




    Add to that cross platform support via iTunes/Quicktime to help continue selling PC users on the Mac model and expanding the potential market base for the device beyond the 3% and growing Mac market share and compete more effectively against the VIIV compliant decives (and integrate with them?) that will be coming out in the next 12-18 months. I think that there is a PC compatible variation of Rendevouz/Bonjour to help out with the seamless networking as well.
  • Reply 17 of 104
    AppleInsiderAppleInsider Posts: 50,754administrator
    In an editorial published on Thursday, renowned Wall Street Journal columnist Walt Mossberg asserted that Apple Computer Inc. is currently working on both a media-playing cell phone and home-media hub.



    Mossberg made the comments in his piece "In Our Post-PC Era, Apple's Device Model Beats the PC Way," which contrasts Apple's end-to-end model of designing both the hardware and software with Microsoft's component model, where many companies make hardware and software that run on a standard platform.



    "In the first war between these models, the war for dominance of the personal-computer market, Microsoft's approach won decisively," Mossberg wrote. "Aided by efficient assemblers like Dell, and by corporate IT departments employed to integrate the components, Microsoft's component-based Windows platform crushed Apple's end-to-end Macintosh platform."



    "But in the post-PC era we're in today, where the focus is on things like music players, game consoles and cellphones, the end-to-end model is the early winner," he continued. "Now, Apple is working on other projects built on the same end-to-end model as the iPod: a media-playing cellphone and a home-media hub."



    Both such products have long been rumored to be under development at Apple's Cupertino, Calif.-based design labs, with several Wall Street analysts predicting the company will debut an iPod-like cell phone later this year and eventually introduce a set-top-box that would act as a centralized media hub for in-home networks. However, Mossberg appears to be the first mainstream journalist to simultaneously vouch for both rumors.
  • Reply 18 of 104
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Hey, Ireland beat you to the punch.
  • Reply 19 of 104
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by DaveGee

    Well,



    Given the fact that I finally knuckled under and re-upped a 2 year Cingular two line family plan contract (and got 2 new SLVRs for only $29 bucks each - with BT headsets ta-boot) .... but only after holding out for almost a full year waiting to see what might happen with Apple .... I think its safe to assume that yes Apple WILL finally come out with their phone and probably soon since the ink on my new contract is just about dry by now.



    Dave






    Don't worry Dave, remember "don't by a rev.A product from apple!"



    With any luck the thing will come unlocked and carrier agnostic.







  • Reply 20 of 104
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by netdog

    I think the above is quite well put. A 1080p stream only requires a maximum of 36Kb of throughput, meaning that 802.11g (Apple's Extreme) is more than capable of handling it. Needless to say, virtually any modern ethernet adapter would be left with tons of headroom, and at worst could even handle three simultaneous streams.



    The practical max throughput of "54mbps" wireless is more like 20Mbps. That is barely enough for full ATSC. That assumes a good link.



    Still, I think 1080p 24fps is just as doable at 20Mbps with MPEG-2. ATSC 1080i is sending 30 full frames a second, 60 half-frames, 24 full frames per second of 1080p is actually less data.
Sign In or Register to comment.