Repeat after me, "Apple is a hardware company; Microsoft is a software company". From that basis you can determine their respective strategies.
The Xbox 360 may be a break even device now and will soon start making money if it hasn't already, but it definitely lost billions initially. Those losses are offset by Xbox live subscriptions and the profit from all the game companies they own. Hardware developed to drive software sales and recurring revenue from subscriptions: a software centric approach.
Apple doesn't develop hardware they can't turn a good profit on. On the other side of the equation they probably lose money at first on new software like iLife because most of the first year sales are free copies bundled with new hardware. The iTunes Music Store exists because Apple wanted a way to drive iPod sales and keep iPod owners from switching to other devices. The store itself only makes enough money to cover ongoing development and the enormous bandwidth costs. Software developed to drive hardware sales, the complete opposite of the Microsoft approach.
If Apple develops games it will be to drive sales of a hardware device that they can sell at a healthy profit. Leopards don't change their spots.
The Xbox 360 may be a break even device now and will soon start making money if it hasn't already, but it definitely lost billions initially. Those losses are offset by Xbox live subscriptions and the profit from all the game companies they own.
'Profit from all the game companies they own'?? Not yet. They still have to pay off the cost of acquiring the game companies they own. They paid something like $400 million for Rare alone. \
Not really the same thing at all, but hey, interesting comparison.
Forbes estimates that MS lost 4 billion on Xbox at least, and they seem to know money. Why even bother to dispute this? Even Microsoft has admitted that in the short term they were going to take a bath... though maybe they didn't count on the water being quite that deep. \
.
I think the point I was trying to make is that with financials you never really know what you have unless you and working the numbers yourself. We don't have SoX compliance because companies have proven to be honest about financial records.
The question really is what's the downside for Apple and what's the upside
I think the point I was trying to make is that with financials you never really know what you have unless you and working the numbers yourself. We don't have SoX compliance because companies have proven to be honest about financial records.
The question really is what's the downside for Apple and what's the upside
The question for Apple is how they can leverage their hardwqare without having to come out with a totally dedicated unit. I think they can do that.
The question for Apple is how they can leverage their hardwqare without having to come out with a totally dedicated unit. I think they can do that.
Hon Hai
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
It would depend on what you do for entertainment. Either choice is reasonable.
I don't play games on my computer, or on a console. But, I do play games on my Treo 700p.
My daughter, however, who is 15, and her friends, play games on several consoles, as well as their computers, AND the DS.
If Apple can stream video from a Mac to the iTV, why not stream the video from a video game? Apple could then make a game controller that hooks to the iTV and it sends the game control signals back to the Mac. The Mac does the game processing and sends the video back. Instant Apple game console with no R&D.
Apple already has games and with Boot Camp, it can even run Windows games. Everybody knows PCs make better games platforms. Upgrade the computer and you upgrade your game console. iTV could just be a link between the two, just like it would for playing tv and movies.
Not saying this is what Apple will do but they could. What Apple needs to solve first is the consumers mess when it comes to setting up HDTV and 5.1 sound. Make one set box that does everything people need for the living room with only one remote. Man, it would be huge.
Then on top of that, let the iTV stream games and you have a game console too for no extra cost. So Apple doesn't need a console. You either play games on the computer or through the iTV. Everything ties back to the Mac.
Now that's what I literally call thinking outside the box.
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
Plus i think this may be the wrong place to ask that question...
If Apple can stream video from a Mac to the iTV, why not stream the video from a video game? Apple could then make a game controller that hooks to the iTV and it sends the game control signals back to the Mac. The Mac does the game processing and sends the video back. Instant Apple game console with no R&D.
Apple already has games and with Boot Camp, it can even run Windows games. Everybody knows PCs make better games platforms. Upgrade the computer and you upgrade your game console. iTV could just be a link between the two, just like it would for playing tv and movies.
Not saying this is what Apple will do but they could. What Apple needs to solve first is the consumers mess when it comes to setting up HDTV and 5.1 sound. Make one set box that does everything people need for the living room with only one remote. Man, it would be huge.
Then on top of that, let the iTV stream games and you have a game console too for no extra cost. So Apple doesn't need a console. You either play games on the computer or through the iTV. Everything ties back to the Mac.
Now that's what I literally call thinking outside the box.
I've said this a few times now, but I'll say it again.
When apple eventually ups the quality on the video to basic HD, that's when we'll see the Apple (Black) TV, iTV READY (i.e. iTV inside) Cool (slightly bigger) remote with a few more than six buttons (eg 8 buttons), it will have a hard drive too (possibly), and a DVD drive (that playes everything).
1. Ditch your VCR
2. Dicth your DVD player
3. Ditch your cable box
4. Buy an Apple TV
5. Sign up to Apple's IPTV service.
6. Finally you have one remote, where you can play basic games downloaded from iTunes through your iTV ready Apple TV, and you can buy movies, songs, and every other type of digital media. No more cluttler around your TV, just a simple, powerful, minimal HDTV from Apple.
However if you want more powerful games, you buy and Xbox 360, a PS3, or a Wii (or the next generation of consoles if Apple takes thier time, though I think they'll move fast on this). It's that simple.
They'll start into the TV space with 2 or 3 sizes, and without the IPTV sevice.
If Apple is said to be working towards their advancement in the gaming market, you can be almost certain that this is little more than a push to try and get better game support to the mac desktop, rather than some grand plan to enter the console market. Now that they use x86's and EFI, it's presumably much easier to leverage existing hardware products, and it undoubtedly reduces the amount of snafu bugs that show up (and have to be debugged) due to the difference in PPC and x86 architectures.
I agree. More PC games is what's needed. All it needs is for Apple to buy up the likes of Aspyr and license a raft of PC games and use technology like Cider to deliver the kind of gaming experience PC users have had for years. They can even cherry-pick the best games we've missed on the Mac like Half-Life 2, Deus Ex 2, Burnout, Need For Speed.
A console needs too much R&D and dedicated developer support. Those developers will see far more profit in the established consoles and leave Apple floating. It would take too much of a loss to compete too. Intel Quad core + Geforce 8800GTX sounds good but would cost an absolute fortune. Even without a Blu-Ray drive. There's no way Apple can compete there, not with the Playstation's games catalogue.
For Apple to have a selling point, they need to offer an attractive option for gamers. Where do PCs fail? Just because Windows is crummy and games crash with bizarre Visual C++ errors and slow down eventually due to fragmentation. Where do consoles fail? You can't use a keyboard and mouse. Selling point = good games on a stable operating system and you can use a keyboard and mouse.
The only extra latency would be the iTV to Mac and back traffic. This depends a lot on one's network but I think this traffic could be streamlined and made fast enough. Apple has Xgrid so they know all about handling latency for other apps.
If the end user doesn't notice this latency, then Apple has a psudeo-console solution for gaming.
Japan would destroy Apple's ambitions of getting into gaming. I guarantee it. Even the iPod isn't doing anything special in terms of performance there. The DS Lite there runs circles around it dozens of times in terms of handheld gadget popularity. Winning Japan is crucial to maintaining a good presence in the gaming market, and is of particular annoyance to Microsoft.
It would be difficult for Apple to compete against Sony/MS/Nintendo. Very difficult. I think the main point of the article, though, was that Sony & MS are going to be wanting to take over the living room - and if Apple wants to play there it will be competing no matter what. (Nintendo has smaller goals).
So Apple needs something compelling there. The price is a good start - the iTV is supposed to be cheaper than the XBOX360 or PS3. They could all offer movies, podcasts, radio, TV - and for a premium cost the XBOX360 & PS3 give you games. But we all know that over time the prices come down on all products and that premium could reduce significantly over time.
It'd be nice to think we could use streaming video for games from the Mac (or PC?) - the latency on communication is in both directions instead of one, BUT with movies we can cache ahead to avoid network hickups. A game can't do that.
Again, it would be hard for Apple to get into games. But they HAVE to be researching what their options are and how they will compete with XBox/PS3
I can see 3 choices IF Apple wants to get involved
1) Go it alone - release a games API that works on iTV and Macs. Make their own games, and encourage developers. Allow iPod games run on iTV too.
2) Work with Nintendo. IF Nintendo makes money from their games, not their WII sales, then they might be quite happy to help Apple's iTV run Nintendo games. Apple gets the gamers, Nintendo makes money on sales of its game controllers and the games themselves.
3) Try to develop an open game API. If Apple can make a game API that allows developers to write for iTV/Linux/OSX/WinXP - they may get a lot of takers. A rallying point for everyone not on the MS/Sony bandwagon? They could probably get Intel's backing too since the major game players don't use Intel chips anymore.
The 4th choice is really not a choice... in my opinion
4) Go head to head with MS & Sony - develop a highly powerful gaming environment in software and hardware and throw billions at it to kickstart the market.
The PS3 and Xbox360 do nothing for simplifying the entertainment system setup. Apple should focus first on that. Whatever this hardware is should be capable of playing some fun games at least. Same for the iPod. So the iTV should have at least some games.
I would guess that there is as big or even bigger demand for entertainment systems then there is for video game consoles. I would guess evey male over 40 is not as interested in gaming but interested in a system that reduces the wires and the remotes.
For example, my Dad is 60 and I have to go over and set his system up for him because he can't figure out how to do it. He struggles to figure out how to record shows to his VCR. He juggles 10 remotes and has terrible quality on his HD-ready television. And he is a smart guy too. I find myself shaking my head and thiking, "He has a Lexus in his garage. What he needs is a Lexus entertainment system in his living room."
Apple can do this. They should be able to add some native gaming component to their iTV at least. Then they should offload the processing for cutting edge computer games. It could be another small box, an expansion card, or another remote computer.
The PS3 and Xbox360 do nothing for simplifying the entertainment system setup. Apple should focus first on that. Whatever this hardware is should be capable of playing some fun games at least. Same for the iPod. So the iTV should have at least some games.
I would guess that there is as big or even bigger demand for entertainment systems then there is for video game consoles. I would guess evey male over 40 is not as interested in gaming but interested in a system that reduces the wires and the remotes.
For example, my Dad is 60 and I have to go over and set his system up for him because he can't figure out how to do it. He struggles to figure out how to record shows to his VCR. He juggles 10 remotes and has terrible quality on his HD-ready television. And he is a smart guy too. I find myself shaking my head and thiking, "He has a Lexus in his garage. What he needs is a Lexus entertainment system in his living room."
Apple can do this. They should be able to add some native gaming component to their iTV at least. Then they should offload the processing for cutting edge computer games. It could be another small box, an expansion card, or another remote computer.
I've said this a few times now, but I'll say it again.
When apple eventually ups the quality on the video to basic HD, that's when we'll see the Apple (Black) TV, iTV READY (i.e. iTV inside) Cool (slightly bigger) remote with a few more than six buttons (eg 8 buttons), it will have a hard drive too (possibly), and a DVD drive (that playes everything).
1. Ditch your VCR
2. Dicth your DVD player
3. Ditch your cable box
4. Buy an Apple TV
5. Sign up to Apple's IPTV service.
6. Finally you have one remote, where you can play basic games downloaded from iTunes through your iTV ready Apple TV, and you can buy movies, songs, and every other type of digital media. No more cluttler around your TV, just a simple, powerful, minimal HDTV from Apple.
However if you want more powerful games, you buy and Xbox 360, a PS3, or a Wii (or the next generation of consoles if Apple takes thier time, though I think they'll move fast on this). It's that simple.
They'll start into the TV space with 2 or 3 sizes, and without the IPTV sevice.
1. 32", 40" & 50"
or
2. 32" & 40"
Yeah.... but who wants an Apple Tv? It'll just be an overpriced, prettied up LCD panel from some other company.
I'm a huge apple fan, but I don't see why people would buy an Apple TV over something like a Pioneer, Sony, or Panasonic?
Also, having the iTV built in i don't think is a good idea. Lets say the TV goes bad... or the iTV.
Never going to happen, however an Apple/Nintendo partnership could be profitable for both companies.
Yeah then Apple and Nintendo could dissolve the partnership before any product actually comes to fruition and then Apple could later release a console based on the intellectual property co-developed? Wait Sony already did that.
Comments
The Xbox 360 may be a break even device now and will soon start making money if it hasn't already, but it definitely lost billions initially. Those losses are offset by Xbox live subscriptions and the profit from all the game companies they own. Hardware developed to drive software sales and recurring revenue from subscriptions: a software centric approach.
Apple doesn't develop hardware they can't turn a good profit on. On the other side of the equation they probably lose money at first on new software like iLife because most of the first year sales are free copies bundled with new hardware. The iTunes Music Store exists because Apple wanted a way to drive iPod sales and keep iPod owners from switching to other devices. The store itself only makes enough money to cover ongoing development and the enormous bandwidth costs. Software developed to drive hardware sales, the complete opposite of the Microsoft approach.
If Apple develops games it will be to drive sales of a hardware device that they can sell at a healthy profit. Leopards don't change their spots.
The Xbox 360 may be a break even device now and will soon start making money if it hasn't already, but it definitely lost billions initially. Those losses are offset by Xbox live subscriptions and the profit from all the game companies they own.
'Profit from all the game companies they own'?? Not yet. They still have to pay off the cost of acquiring the game companies they own. They paid something like $400 million for Rare alone.
.
The closest thing Apple will do to gaming is supplying a controller for use when iTV is on.
-=|Mgkwho
Not really the same thing at all, but hey, interesting comparison.
Forbes estimates that MS lost 4 billion on Xbox at least, and they seem to know money. Why even bother to dispute this? Even Microsoft has admitted that in the short term they were going to take a bath... though maybe they didn't count on the water being quite that deep.
.
I think the point I was trying to make is that with financials you never really know what you have unless you and working the numbers yourself. We don't have SoX compliance because companies have proven to be honest about financial records.
The question really is what's the downside for Apple and what's the upside
I think the point I was trying to make is that with financials you never really know what you have unless you and working the numbers yourself. We don't have SoX compliance because companies have proven to be honest about financial records.
The question really is what's the downside for Apple and what's the upside
The question for Apple is how they can leverage their hardwqare without having to come out with a totally dedicated unit. I think they can do that.
The question for Apple is how they can leverage their hardwqare without having to come out with a totally dedicated unit. I think they can do that.
Hon Hai
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
Hon Hai
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
It would depend on what you do for entertainment. Either choice is reasonable.
I don't play games on my computer, or on a console. But, I do play games on my Treo 700p.
My daughter, however, who is 15, and her friends, play games on several consoles, as well as their computers, AND the DS.
Apple already has games and with Boot Camp, it can even run Windows games. Everybody knows PCs make better games platforms. Upgrade the computer and you upgrade your game console. iTV could just be a link between the two, just like it would for playing tv and movies.
Not saying this is what Apple will do but they could. What Apple needs to solve first is the consumers mess when it comes to setting up HDTV and 5.1 sound. Make one set box that does everything people need for the living room with only one remote. Man, it would be huge.
Then on top of that, let the iTV stream games and you have a game console too for no extra cost. So Apple doesn't need a console. You either play games on the computer or through the iTV. Everything ties back to the Mac.
Now that's what I literally call thinking outside the box.
Hon Hai
People act as if Apple doesn't have one hell of a supply chain. Microsoft makes input devices. Apple makes whole computers. It's far less of a stretch to think of Apple delivering a good hardware platform than Microsoft.
Let's be honest...if you had $299.98 burning a hole in your pocket and need to get the most for your money are you likely to buy the iTV or the Xbox 360?
Plus i think this may be the wrong place to ask that question...
If Apple can stream video from a Mac to the iTV, why not stream the video from a video game? Apple could then make a game controller that hooks to the iTV and it sends the game control signals back to the Mac. The Mac does the game processing and sends the video back. Instant Apple game console with no R&D.
Apple already has games and with Boot Camp, it can even run Windows games. Everybody knows PCs make better games platforms. Upgrade the computer and you upgrade your game console. iTV could just be a link between the two, just like it would for playing tv and movies.
Not saying this is what Apple will do but they could. What Apple needs to solve first is the consumers mess when it comes to setting up HDTV and 5.1 sound. Make one set box that does everything people need for the living room with only one remote. Man, it would be huge.
Then on top of that, let the iTV stream games and you have a game console too for no extra cost. So Apple doesn't need a console. You either play games on the computer or through the iTV. Everything ties back to the Mac.
Now that's what I literally call thinking outside the box.
And what about latemcy?
When apple eventually ups the quality on the video to basic HD, that's when we'll see the Apple (Black) TV, iTV READY (i.e. iTV inside) Cool (slightly bigger) remote with a few more than six buttons (eg 8 buttons), it will have a hard drive too (possibly), and a DVD drive (that playes everything).
1. Ditch your VCR
2. Dicth your DVD player
3. Ditch your cable box
4. Buy an Apple TV
5. Sign up to Apple's IPTV service.
6. Finally you have one remote, where you can play basic games downloaded from iTunes through your iTV ready Apple TV, and you can buy movies, songs, and every other type of digital media. No more cluttler around your TV, just a simple, powerful, minimal HDTV from Apple.
However if you want more powerful games, you buy and Xbox 360, a PS3, or a Wii (or the next generation of consoles if Apple takes thier time, though I think they'll move fast on this). It's that simple.
They'll start into the TV space with 2 or 3 sizes, and without the IPTV sevice.
1. 32", 40" & 50"
or
2. 32" & 40"
If Apple is said to be working towards their advancement in the gaming market, you can be almost certain that this is little more than a push to try and get better game support to the mac desktop, rather than some grand plan to enter the console market. Now that they use x86's and EFI, it's presumably much easier to leverage existing hardware products, and it undoubtedly reduces the amount of snafu bugs that show up (and have to be debugged) due to the difference in PPC and x86 architectures.
I agree. More PC games is what's needed. All it needs is for Apple to buy up the likes of Aspyr and license a raft of PC games and use technology like Cider to deliver the kind of gaming experience PC users have had for years. They can even cherry-pick the best games we've missed on the Mac like Half-Life 2, Deus Ex 2, Burnout, Need For Speed.
A console needs too much R&D and dedicated developer support. Those developers will see far more profit in the established consoles and leave Apple floating. It would take too much of a loss to compete too. Intel Quad core + Geforce 8800GTX sounds good but would cost an absolute fortune. Even without a Blu-Ray drive. There's no way Apple can compete there, not with the Playstation's games catalogue.
For Apple to have a selling point, they need to offer an attractive option for gamers. Where do PCs fail? Just because Windows is crummy and games crash with bizarre Visual C++ errors and slow down eventually due to fragmentation. Where do consoles fail? You can't use a keyboard and mouse. Selling point = good games on a stable operating system and you can use a keyboard and mouse.
About latency.
The only extra latency would be the iTV to Mac and back traffic. This depends a lot on one's network but I think this traffic could be streamlined and made fast enough. Apple has Xgrid so they know all about handling latency for other apps.
If the end user doesn't notice this latency, then Apple has a psudeo-console solution for gaming.
So Apple needs something compelling there. The price is a good start - the iTV is supposed to be cheaper than the XBOX360 or PS3. They could all offer movies, podcasts, radio, TV - and for a premium cost the XBOX360 & PS3 give you games. But we all know that over time the prices come down on all products and that premium could reduce significantly over time.
It'd be nice to think we could use streaming video for games from the Mac (or PC?) - the latency on communication is in both directions instead of one, BUT with movies we can cache ahead to avoid network hickups. A game can't do that.
Again, it would be hard for Apple to get into games. But they HAVE to be researching what their options are and how they will compete with XBox/PS3
I can see 3 choices IF Apple wants to get involved
1) Go it alone - release a games API that works on iTV and Macs. Make their own games, and encourage developers. Allow iPod games run on iTV too.
2) Work with Nintendo. IF Nintendo makes money from their games, not their WII sales, then they might be quite happy to help Apple's iTV run Nintendo games. Apple gets the gamers, Nintendo makes money on sales of its game controllers and the games themselves.
3) Try to develop an open game API. If Apple can make a game API that allows developers to write for iTV/Linux/OSX/WinXP - they may get a lot of takers. A rallying point for everyone not on the MS/Sony bandwagon? They could probably get Intel's backing too since the major game players don't use Intel chips anymore.
The 4th choice is really not a choice... in my opinion
4) Go head to head with MS & Sony - develop a highly powerful gaming environment in software and hardware and throw billions at it to kickstart the market.
I would guess that there is as big or even bigger demand for entertainment systems then there is for video game consoles. I would guess evey male over 40 is not as interested in gaming but interested in a system that reduces the wires and the remotes.
For example, my Dad is 60 and I have to go over and set his system up for him because he can't figure out how to do it. He struggles to figure out how to record shows to his VCR. He juggles 10 remotes and has terrible quality on his HD-ready television. And he is a smart guy too. I find myself shaking my head and thiking, "He has a Lexus in his garage. What he needs is a Lexus entertainment system in his living room."
Apple can do this. They should be able to add some native gaming component to their iTV at least. Then they should offload the processing for cutting edge computer games. It could be another small box, an expansion card, or another remote computer.
The PS3 and Xbox360 do nothing for simplifying the entertainment system setup. Apple should focus first on that. Whatever this hardware is should be capable of playing some fun games at least. Same for the iPod. So the iTV should have at least some games.
I would guess that there is as big or even bigger demand for entertainment systems then there is for video game consoles. I would guess evey male over 40 is not as interested in gaming but interested in a system that reduces the wires and the remotes.
For example, my Dad is 60 and I have to go over and set his system up for him because he can't figure out how to do it. He struggles to figure out how to record shows to his VCR. He juggles 10 remotes and has terrible quality on his HD-ready television. And he is a smart guy too. I find myself shaking my head and thiking, "He has a Lexus in his garage. What he needs is a Lexus entertainment system in his living room."
Apple can do this. They should be able to add some native gaming component to their iTV at least. Then they should offload the processing for cutting edge computer games. It could be another small box, an expansion card, or another remote computer.
You should read my last comment.
I've said this a few times now, but I'll say it again.
When apple eventually ups the quality on the video to basic HD, that's when we'll see the Apple (Black) TV, iTV READY (i.e. iTV inside) Cool (slightly bigger) remote with a few more than six buttons (eg 8 buttons), it will have a hard drive too (possibly), and a DVD drive (that playes everything).
1. Ditch your VCR
2. Dicth your DVD player
3. Ditch your cable box
4. Buy an Apple TV
5. Sign up to Apple's IPTV service.
6. Finally you have one remote, where you can play basic games downloaded from iTunes through your iTV ready Apple TV, and you can buy movies, songs, and every other type of digital media. No more cluttler around your TV, just a simple, powerful, minimal HDTV from Apple.
However if you want more powerful games, you buy and Xbox 360, a PS3, or a Wii (or the next generation of consoles if Apple takes thier time, though I think they'll move fast on this). It's that simple.
They'll start into the TV space with 2 or 3 sizes, and without the IPTV sevice.
1. 32", 40" & 50"
or
2. 32" & 40"
Yeah.... but who wants an Apple Tv? It'll just be an overpriced, prettied up LCD panel from some other company.
I'm a huge apple fan, but I don't see why people would buy an Apple TV over something like a Pioneer, Sony, or Panasonic?
Also, having the iTV built in i don't think is a good idea. Lets say the TV goes bad... or the iTV.
Never going to happen, however an Apple/Nintendo partnership could be profitable for both companies.
Yeah then Apple and Nintendo could dissolve the partnership before any product actually comes to fruition and then Apple could later release a console based on the intellectual property co-developed? Wait Sony already did that.
Aaron
Yeah.... but who wants an Apple Tv? It'll just be an overpriced, prettied up LCD panel from some other company.
I'm a huge apple fan, but I don't see why people would buy an Apple TV over something like a Pioneer, Sony, or Panasonic?
Also, having the iTV built in i don't think is a good idea. Lets say the TV goes bad... or the iTV.
Like it or not, it will happen.