Apple's iTV delay doesn't help "dull holiday season" - report

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    Uh, thanks...I suppose.



    Take it as a compliment 8)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 62 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    But, what we generally do here, is to guess, pray, and keep our fingers crossed that what we want will come true. Sometimes it does, and then we feel as though we knew all along, even though we didn't...You know that's true too...



    AppleInsider has had a pretty good track record this year. Some misses like WhereTF is the iPhone and "touch me everywhere" iPod Widescreen. Those to be filed under 2006 - MIA (Missing-In-Action). Mac Pro and MacBookPro Rev 2 (Core2Duo) were good calls, as was the 13" wide MacBook. Shmancy iMacs and MacMini-all-dualcore are a nice roundoff to the Mac side of things. iPod nano full-metal-jacket was another triumph for AppleInsider and us all. We kinda knew all along... and we kinda did! And the mockups were kinda close! And I scored a touchdown/ home run/ try/ hit-for-a-six (cricket?) / scored a goal/ with the 50-cent-obsession thing.... and that's the kinda feeling that keeps you coming back for more. A lot of AppleInsiders massaged their predictions and closer to the releases with different info popping up we kinda got it almost spot-on. Almost..... just a bit of sand slipping through the fingers. Gods bless those kids in the know that sell their souls out to the rumour sites and hardcore-violate their non-disclosures.



    I'm praying for other things since I've got other pressing issues at this stage, and I've burnt out from the rumor excitement for this year. It's a solid Christmas lineup, and it's good to see. I'll pop back now and then to scope out what goodies are in store for MacWorld, but I don't think it will be slam-bam shock and awe. It's a progressive strategy for Apple in 2007, we'll see how they go - they've got space to grow, and they're looking at specific markets to do that. It won't be business as usual, now that Macs are on mainstream hardware and OS X is cruising through for the most part. We'll see what's next...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 63 of 98
    (side joke) Will Santa Claus have a couple of F-117s escort him around the world this Christmas? Just so that (a) he doesn't get hijacked by terrorists and we have all sorts of not-so-fun-presents down our chimneys and (b) he doesn't get shot down by Iran/ NKorea/ Iraq/ USA/ China/ NATO/ etc. I know there's something in the US where NORAD "tracks Santa Claus" but in today's global terror environment even Santa Claus isn't safe. And the Tooth Fairy is actually a demonic hellspawn that puts all the teeth in a big simmering cauldron to make Listerine.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 64 of 98
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman


    (side joke) Will Santa Claus have a couple of F-117s escort him around the world this Christmas? Just so that (a) he doesn't get hijacked by terrorists and we have all sorts of not-so-fun-presents down our chimneys and (b) he doesn't get shot down by Iran/ NKorea/ Iraq/ USA/ China/ NATO/ etc. I know there's something in the US where NORAD "tracks Santa Claus" but in today's global terror environment even Santa Claus isn't safe. And the Tooth Fairy is actually a demonic hellspawn that puts all the teeth in a big simmering cauldron to make Listerine.



    F-22's I would think, he needs the speed.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 65 of 98
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    F-22's I would think, he needs the speed.



    Oh, I don't know, it's a lean year this time round, lots of naughty naughty naughty boys and girls. Mmmm.... Me included, I think.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 66 of 98
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Man, over 20 entries since I last visited. I thought this thread was pretty much dead and woe, you two have been at it.



    Back to my response: Plenty of businesses stay in business despite giving bad or slanted advice. Enderle Group? Gartner? McKinsey & Co. (see Enron's hiring of "MBA superstars") They're all still in business. Some have been questioned in hindsight but only years after; they were not seriously questioned at the time of their bad or slanted advice.



    So why are you (melgross) so upset that people (well, maybe just sunilraman and me) would question the "objectivity" of iSuppli in this report? Why do you come off treating us all as if we are dummies and that you're the only one with any business sense? You've trumpeted your qualifications several times in other threads, so yeah, you might know something, fine and dandy. But even though we might reasons not to tell you what we do in life or how successful we are, please don't think that we're all business idiots.



    Back to iSuppli, they measure stuff and report numbers and I find those to be objective. But they're beginning to offer more analysis and I've come across previous reports of their reports where I thought they weren't really tracking. (Same goes for NPD.)



    Now sometimes it's purely mistaken analysis. But oftentimes, it's just that they have blinders on and view everything from a particular perspective - I call that a slant. Enderle Group has a slant. Gartner might just be incompetent. McKinsey has a slant.



    And some people are quicker to see it and move away, and others are slower and buy into it and don't face their appropriate fate until some later day (like Enron).



    Like sunilraman said, many of us work in companies, and we can see how companies can adopt a view of the world (i.e. mental models) and then try to fit everything into it. And because of that, sometimes it's hard to see change and discontinuities. There's plenty written about this, so no need for me to explain more.



    Have a great weekend.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 67 of 98
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    Just to reply specifically:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    As I just said, the quote could have been from a news report that was reporting it. But, even if not, as I also said, and you just confermed yourself, the "delay" could be for the reasons iof unfinalized standards.



    This is a Christmas season product. I hope that isn't really doubted. The fact that Jobs felt compelled to pre-announce it shows that. the fact that it is waiting until some unspecified time after Christmas to be released is a fairly good indication that is is being delayed.



    My point is that they provided no evidence - they simply asserted. People, including us, are speculating that the delay is due to the mess in standardizing 802.11n, and we may all be right, but we don't know. If they are going to assert that it was pushed back, then they should tell us why they think so since Apple did not say that.



    By the way, you and I and iSuppli think this should've been released before Christmas. But recognize that Apple has a history of releasing new stuff in January. So it's not out of character for them. Others come to CES in Jan with cool stuff that won't be ready for release for another 3-4 months. Apple comes to MacWorld in Jan ready to release products. iSuppli could've balanced their report with this type of background.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    I suppose then that you can show us where you got your information that they are not being delayed? Or is that your slant?



    Why do you feel as though they have to have a slant in the first place? Exactly what good would that do them? It makes no sense.



    I have no evidence that a widescreen iPod was not delayed. But I didn't put out a report implying that it was. I'm just commenting that they are implying something without any evidence of such. And if it was "delayed", as I said before, I speculate it may have been because Apple felt they already had good enough products to generate good enough sales in the market, and so chose to aim for Jan, giving them time to make a better product and get more bang for the buck in a normally quiet quarter. In other words, it may not be a technical delay but just Apple's planning process. If Apple felt the current iPods were too weak, they could've taken what they had and released it. (My speculation is based on Apple's past behavior when I've correlated releases of Macintosh and iPod upgrades of minimal improvements, and the declining sales of the previous versions.)



    And if I have a slant, that's okay because I'm not putting out reports for the world to buy and spread and act upon. I'm just throwing my .02 in on a forum that questions their advice.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    At any rate, this continual bashing of these people accomplishes nothing constructive.



    No one's bashing them. I'm just questioning their objectivity in asserting stuff without explaining where they got it from. Anyone who reads someone else's report would do well to question it. If there was no forum here, I wouldn't have contributed anything and left everyone to their own thoughts.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 68 of 98
    mark2005mark2005 Posts: 1,158member
    One last comment: Former Apple employee Chuq Von Rospach blogs about this "idiot" at

    http://chuqui.typepad.com/chuqui_30/...nsider_ap.html



    Not saying he's right, but ...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 69 of 98
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005


    Man, over 20 entries since I last visited. I thought this thread was pretty much dead and woe, you two have been at it.



    Back to my response: Plenty of businesses stay in business despite giving bad or slanted advice. Enderle Group? Gartner? McKinsey & Co. (see Enron's hiring of "MBA superstars") They're all still in business. Some have been questioned in hindsight but only years after; they were not seriously questioned at the time of their bad or slanted advice.



    So why are you (melgross) so upset that people (well, maybe just sunilraman and me) would question the "objectivity" of iSuppli in this report? Why do you come off treating us all as if we are dummies and that you're the only one with any business sense? You've trumpeted your qualifications several times in other threads, so yeah, you might know something, fine and dandy. But even though we might reasons not to tell you what we do in life or how successful we are, please don't think that we're all business idiots.



    Back to iSuppli, they measure stuff and report numbers and I find those to be objective. But they're beginning to offer more analysis and I've come across previous reports of their reports where I thought they weren't really tracking. (Same goes for NPD.)



    Now sometimes it's purely mistaken analysis. But oftentimes, it's just that they have blinders on and view everything from a particular perspective - I call that a slant. Enderle Group has a slant. Gartner might just be incompetent. McKinsey has a slant.



    And some people are quicker to see it and move away, and others are slower and buy into it and don't face their appropriate fate until some later day (like Enron).



    Like sunilraman said, many of us work in companies, and we can see how companies can adopt a view of the world (i.e. mental models) and then try to fit everything into it. And because of that, sometimes it's hard to see change and discontinuities. There's plenty written about this, so no need for me to explain more.



    Have a great weekend.



    What I've been saying for a long time is that what we see is not what their customers see.



    What we see is the publicity information they give out, or the bits and pieces the reporting on it gives us. It may be calculated to garner response, talk, and even criticism. But, it isn't indicative of the work they do for their clients.



    I do find it difficult to understand why people would think that companies that give bad information, and analysis, could remain in business, year after year. They can't.



    I've also already said that they aren't correct about everything. But, businesses must have information, and they don't have the resources to get most of it themselves. These companies do. It's all they do.



    They supply information, and analysis, for many companies, in different industries.



    Slanting their reports to favor, or to denigrate any one of those areas would only anger other clients. That wouldn't do.



    Even Enderle, who is opinionated in his columns, is not so one-sided in his reports. None of them are.



    And while it may seem, years later, that some of the analysis was wrong, it was the best that could be given at the time.



    What these companies offer is probabilities. They are based on what is known about past behavior, and current trends. They use information they gather from individuals in companies who are in the process. They make a best case. That's what they do. usually they are pretty close.



    But, this is like political analysis. There is a baseline. But that baseline has a plus and minus percentage assigned to it.



    Just as political surveys don't predict winners and losers, just percentages with that plus and minus surrounding them, these companies offer that same type of work. The reports are often peppered with "to the best of our knowledge", "as far as we can ascertain", "from the information presented", etc.



    Their clients can easily understand that the reports are not definitive, just best case analysis, subject to change.



    All I ever ask here, is that people try to understand that, rather than aspiring to impugn their motives every time.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 70 of 98
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mark2005


    My point is that they provided no evidence - they simply asserted. People, including us, are speculating that the delay is due to the mess in standardizing 802.11n, and we may all be right, but we don't know. If they are going to assert that it was pushed back, then they should tell us why they think so since Apple did not say that.



    What I've said, is that this is just one or two sentences. If you haven't read the entire report, you don't know what was said there.



    I can give a good example of this.



    Look at the article from Friday here on AI: "Overseas pub causes commotion with new MacBook rumors"



    We all thought that was funny, right? But it's what happens when reading a headline, and not the actual story.



    We have had headlines here on AI that often seem to be misleading—after the article was read.



    It's likely whateven information that was released to the public was written by the publicity department. Correct, but too obtuse without the rest of the report.



    Quote:

    By the way, you and I and iSuppli think this should've been released before Christmas. But recognize that Apple has a history of releasing new stuff in January. So it's not out of character for them. Others come to CES in Jan with cool stuff that won't be ready for release for another 3-4 months. Apple comes to MacWorld in Jan ready to release products. iSuppli could've balanced their report with this type of background.



    Yes. And, I did say that they are not ALWAYS correct. Or the reasons may not always be. But without the report in hand...



    Quote:

    I have no evidence that a widescreen iPod was not delayed. But I didn't put out a report implying that it was. I'm just commenting that they are implying something without any evidence of such. And if it was "delayed", as I said before, I speculate it may have been because Apple felt they already had good enough products to generate good enough sales in the market, and so chose to aim for Jan, giving them time to make a better product and get more bang for the buck in a normally quiet quarter. In other words, it may not be a technical delay but just Apple's planning process. If Apple felt the current iPods were too weak, they could've taken what they had and released it. (My speculation is based on Apple's past behavior when I've correlated releases of Macintosh and iPod upgrades of minimal improvements, and the declining sales of the previous versions.)



    But, you are not in the business, and don't have access to the information they have, on which they base their statements.





    Quote:

    And if I have a slant, that's okay because I'm not putting out reports for the world to buy and spread and act upon. I'm just throwing my .02 in on a forum that questions their advice.



    Of course. Your slant is fine. I'm not saying it isn't. I'm just saying that those here who are so upset with these companies, have their own agenda, and it isn't objective.





    Quote:

    No one's bashing them. I'm just questioning their objectivity in asserting stuff without explaining where they got it from. Anyone who reads someone else's report would do well to question it. If there was no forum here, I wouldn't have contributed anything and left everyone to their own thoughts.



    I'm not saying that YOU have said anything dumb, but others have.



    Ok, let's see some comments from the group.



    "this is baseless report. moving on."



    "These research firms are such garbage-"



    "these analysts are stupid"



    "Can't be a serious research firm if they used the word "spiffy" in their report. Horseshit is mighty cheap and plentiful these days."



    "hahahahahahahahaha...



    These people make me laugh, I shall allow them to live."



    "You're an escapading(sic) idiot."



    "This report is total garbage, it bears repeating. TOTAL GARBAGE"



    "What are they trying to accomplish by saying something that is blatently false? Or do you think they are not aware of the fact that their statement is false?"



    "The companies remain in business for long *because* they have business sense - that is, ethics, common sense and *intelligence* take a back seat"
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 71 of 98
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sunilraman


    802.11n is a fracking mess. The frequency flooding of 2.4ghz channels obliterates 802.11b and 802.11g networks around it. Signal range dropoff is nasty. WEP and WPA2 are problematic in terms of throughput. There are a lot of problems with 802.11n and most computer magazines and online websites attest to this



    Yes. But it is much faster when it works.



    Quote:

    The consortium is very much behind, we are looking at realistically mid-2007 for final 802.11n ratification and sorting out the challenges of 802.11n.



    IEEE is behind and it wont be till late 2007 for a final. The WiFi Alliance is going forward to certify draft-N devices.



    Quote:

    I understand the take on 802.11n holding back iTV, but given most of the installed base of Macs are 802.11g, iTV *MUST* operate well within existing 802.11g home environments.



    Given that iTV isn't a core element of Macs AND iTV works with PCs I don't buy this argument. In any case it appears recent macs are shipping with draft-N chips with N disabled. iMacs are rumored to have the Broadcom Draft-N chipsets and the new Core 2 Duo MBPs have the Atheros draft N chipset.



    Quote:

    Reports here or in other places that put the blame on 802.11n are not being smart. 802.11n is at least 6 months out from being finalised, let alone a standard that doesn't face the tons of issues making pre-N crap at this stage....



    Because a) 802.11g doesn't support video streaming all that well today b) draft-N has the QOS support that makes streaming better c) G certainly doesn't support HD rates (except in the theoretical performance levels that rarely occur outside the lab) and iTV is going to be iDOA without HD and d) there isn't any real technical challenge other than wireless performace in such a box to force such a long delay.



    Vinea
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 72 of 98
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea


    Yes. But [802.11n] is much faster when it works.



    Just be prepared when neighbours come knocking on your door with, "Hey, I live upstairs from you, perhaps you've seen me before... My name is Lola..."



    Oops wrong train of thought.... Um, when neighbours come round and are like, hey, my wireless is fracked, how's yours? just remember to play it cool and say something like, "yeah, mine's screwed too. Must be too many wireless networks in the area around...."



    You then go back to your delicious 802.11n superMAXultraUBERspeed wireless network.... muah ah h hah ahah ha ahha hah aa
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 73 of 98
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Unless I get a iTV and it supports HD I doubt I'll be getting a draft-N device.



    If I do get one, eh, there are about 4 access points I can see and 3 are open so it is pretty crowded already. If I bothered I probably could get access to their router admin pages. Probably though the location of my access point (in the basement) should keep most others unaffected. The only way to their computers is through several feet of dirt or via reflections.



    Eh. Its an issue BUT it doesn't mean that iTV wont depend on draft-N.



    Vinea
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 74 of 98
    LOL, what delay ?

    Jobs didn't said i was scheduled for holidays. He said from the start that is was a preview and was scheduled for first quarter.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 75 of 98
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea


    a) 802.11g doesn't support video streaming all that well today



    Not sure what you mean (except for no QoS, as you mentioned) since my 802.11g WLAN handles video streaming to EyeHome quite well with any supported (non-HD) content.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 76 of 98
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sjk


    Not sure what you mean (except for no QoS, as you mentioned) since my 802.11g WLAN handles video streaming to EyeHome quite well with any supported (non-HD) content.



    Yeah... Vinea AFAIK is talking about handling video streaming of HD content which he believes is important to have for iTV. That would need 802.11n-something But where will the HD content come from? iTMS?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 77 of 98
    802.11n its not only important cause the HD, it will handle all data way faster than actual technology/older 802.11.

    For me thats enough to spend on it once its out next year.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 78 of 98
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,663member
    Ok, well here's an interesting one from our dear friend Enderle.



    Skip by the IBM and Oracle stuff if that doesn't interest you to get to the Apple stuff.



    It isn't the January Leopard thingie he's talking about that's of interest here, but his talk about the iTv and Intel. It is an interesting, and not that farfetched, point he makes



    We can fight about the January 10.5 release date elsewhere if people want to.



    http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/53950.html
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 79 of 98
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    We can fight about the January 10.5 release date elsewhere if people want to...



    For the record a Macworld Leopard announcement for Feb shipping is not out of the question. And I'm not saying this because I don't want to fight with Melgross about it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 80 of 98
    "Based on the chatter I'm seeing it appears very likely that Apple is preparing a little surprise for Microsoft at MacWorld which happens at the same time as the Consumer Electronics Show in January. While Microsoft and partners will be talking about Vista in advance of the launch of that product at CES, Apple, along with Intel, will be launching Apple's version of the Media Center with iTV and Leopard. That's right -- Leopard. It looks like this puppy is nearly ready if I'm reading the signs right -- and Apple is clearly setting up for something big."



    .

    That's interesting, and it's very possible*. It's true that for the most part people are all like WTF is Viiv - Apple and Intel alongside iTV and Leopard [Media Centre Edition]** at Macworld 2007 Jan would kick major ass.





    *Again, not just agreeing with Melgross or anyone else just because I'm tired of fighting. But I am tired of fighting in general. Let's bring back the loooove people. Yeah........



    (edit: 1 hour later) OH NO I'm COMING DOWN!!!!! arghgghg

    just kidding, no drugs for me still for quite some while.



    **Not suggesting different versions of Leopard but referring here to media centre functionality in 10.5.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.