While that is a proof that *some* company will go for the gusto here, I don't see it as a strong indicator that *Apple* will. I mean, they *might*, but right now I think it's just wishful thinking.
After all, Dell sells cheapo stripped down boxes for a couple hundred bucks, but you don't see Apple doing it. Just because *a* company will produce the product, doesn't mean *Apple* will produce the product.
I dunno, I mean, if they can pull something out of their hat that makes it an OMG different beast, then yeah, they might go for it. But I don't see them doing it if they're going to be Just Another Company in that market. It's just not the Apple way of doing things.
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here.
OTOH, an add-on iTV box that works with any screen out there, *that* would be a big hit, IMO.
I mean, maybe they'll pull it off, but my nose says no.
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
I'm always amazed at how people on forums think they are the average consumer. We aren't.
The time for a company to move to other product categories is when both it, as a brand, and the category, are hot. Both of those two prescriptions are true now.
When I buy my next hi def set, I would carefully consider an Apple branded model, if they had one that fit my needs, before other brands. I' know I'm not the only one, because I've asked others that question.
There are commodity brands, mid priced brands, and lines, and hi end brands, and lines. ALL are selling well.
There is no reason to assume that Apple couldn't pick one or more areas to sell into, and be successful.
The tens of millions of iPod users who are looking forward to a new set would certainly consider one. After we credit them for selling more Mac's, a MUCH more difficult decision to make. An Apple Tv would be simple. People switch brands all the time. After all, they are all compatible, not like the situation with computer platforms.
And what about those Mac owners who have spent $1,000 or more for a new computer? If they are happy with their purchase, you can be sure they would consider one as well.
People like to stick with brands they like. If they don't like them they will switch easily. Unless everyone is happy with their current models, moving to an Apple model, which they already perceive as being better, would not be such a difficult decision.
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
Vinea
Hell, I can actually completely agree with you on this one.
I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here.
OTOH, an add-on iTV box that works with any screen out there, *that* would be a big hit, IMO.
I mean, maybe they'll pull it off, but my nose says no.
That's what I think. Current Apple displays aren't cheap enough compared to other LCDs to expect that a TV would be. If on the other hand they had access to some nice new technology like SED or Laser then that's a whole other ballgame but I highly doubt it.
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
The *only* thing I'd point out here, since I have no idea whether they will, or they won't, is that this same reasoning has been used to state why Apple *MUST* jump into the econobox computer market, ala Dell. After all, it's a best selling category, so that alone would be enough reason... but we know that's not true.
I dunno. They may come out with one that's the Lexus end of things, but then they risk the same "Apple is expensive!" perception problem they have with the Macs. It just seems... not exactly *wrong* to my gut, but at least unright.
My guess is still that the iTV will be an inexpensive (relatively) add-on box for the average consumer to plop into their existing home theatre system, and *extend* the Mac experience. It won't be a full computer, it'll be just a gateway to the computer they already have. If it's Windows, it'll offer iTunes (music and video) integration. If it's a Mac, it'll offer a lot more, including, hopefully, the VNC-ish feature you mentioned.
Tying it into a $$$ display, however... doesn't feel right.
Now, if they do that projection display idea I threw around a couple years ago...
I think the iPod, iPhone, and iTV and any other surprises prove that Apple is moving to the consumer digital electronics model and using Mac as it''s base but in time will NOT be it's biggest business.
The *only* thing I'd point out here, since I have no idea whether they will, or they won't, is that this same reasoning has been used to state why Apple *MUST* jump into the econobox computer market, ala Dell. After all, it's a best selling category, so that alone would be enough reason... but we know that's not true.
I dunno. They may come out with one that's the Lexus end of things, but then they risk the same "Apple is expensive!" perception problem they have with the Macs. It just seems... not exactly *wrong* to my gut, but at least unright.
My guess is still that the iTV will be an inexpensive (relatively) add-on box for the average consumer to plop into their existing home theatre system, and *extend* the Mac experience. It won't be a full computer, it'll be just a gateway to the computer they already have. If it's Windows, it'll offer iTunes (music and video) integration. If it's a Mac, it'll offer a lot more, including, hopefully, the VNC-ish feature you mentioned.
Tying it into a $$$ display, however... doesn't feel right.
I don't see a problem with Apple coming out with "Lexus" pricing. It's what people expect, after all.
Companies have a history of first coming out with a premium product line. Once that line is established, and the agreement is that it is indeed premium, they then move to the next lower level, using the same branding. Then they move it still lower.
People will always associate the brand with the premium product line, and eye the less expensive versions as being of the same quality. Lexus itself has gone that way, as has Mercedes, and BMW.
It's more difficult to move the other way, as numerous brands have discovered. Cheap is going to be perceived as cheap for a long time.
I don't see a problem with Apple coming out with "Lexus" pricing. It's what people expect, after all.
I still don't see how this translates to Apple entering the high-end home display market, but... whatevva. I'm still perfectly willing to be surprised on this one.
I think Jobs sees reality... that TVs are just big monitors... so this makes sense.
...
No, they're not. A 23" Apple Cinema Display can display a 1920 x 1080 HD image at full resolution with room to spare. A 30" ACD can display four (4) 1280 x 720 HD images at full resolution simultaneously with room to space. These is a feat which no HD monitor in this size category can match. As a computer monitor, the best consumer HDTV is a poor substitute. As TV sets, Apple Cinema Displays are at once too expensive and too small.
Several posters have already said this, but it bears repeating. Apple's entry into the TV market makes no economic sense. The price of flat panel displays is dropping like a stone. A lot of them are being sold, but the supply continues to outstrip demand by a wide margin. In addition to the usual consumer electronic stories, I can now walk into Wal-Mart, Office Depot, or CompUSA and walk out with an integrated LCD HDTV for about $600. I can get a 42" plasma screen integrated HDTV for about $1300. This represents a substantial drop from just 6 months ago.
The likes of Dell and HP entered this market because they have already saturated their primary customer base. They needed markets to expand into. OTOH, Apple's primary customer base is expanding. Entering the TV market is a desparate move that it does not need.
I don't see why Apple has to make big screen displays. Let the TV people do it! All Apple has to do is make things that shoot video out an HDMI port, then let us hook it to our TVs and stereos, no?
"I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here."
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
Note that you just state the wide screen hi-defs a big sellers. The original quote is talking 'big screen' market. They aren't mutually inclusive. The sub-$1000 20-30" wide screens are extremely popular. But I don't know who'd call those 'Big-screen'.
Of course, for a company that espoused years ago about "the year of HD", you'd think they would've had ONE monitor that was HDTV compatible (i.e. HDMI port, or component video port, or something that would allow you to view HD content).
Note that you just state the wide screen hi-defs a big sellers. The original quote is talking 'big screen' market. They aren't mutually inclusive. The sub-$1000 20-30" wide screens are extremely popular. But I don't know who'd call those 'Big-screen'.
Of course, for a company that espoused years ago about "the year of HD", you'd think they would've had ONE monitor that was HDTV compatible (i.e. HDMI port, or component video port, or something that would allow you to view HD content).
They do. The computer. I don't think Apple is interested in people using their displays as a TV.
I don't see why Apple has to make big screen displays. Let the TV people do it! All Apple has to do is make things that shoot video out an HDMI port, then let us hook it to our TVs and stereos, no?
I think perhaps iTV is a tad too close to the AirPort Express which didn't exactly set the world on fire. A HDTV with iTV intergrated into it coupled with iTunes has a more iPodish potential. Not that Apple is going to corner the market on HDTVs but in terms of capturing mindshare a HDTV that only needs to be plugged into the power outlet that can do HD wirelessly has a level of panache that the rest of the market doesn't currently enjoy.
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
Vinea
Excellent points, vinea. We would Apple make it's own monitors but then shy away from other monitors just because it has an integrated TV Tuner? Well, I certainly can't think of valid reason.
If anyone can pull off all this integration we have going on now, it's certainly Apple. I will gladly pay a little more for something that "just works"; and I doubt that I'm alone.
Comments
While that is a proof that *some* company will go for the gusto here, I don't see it as a strong indicator that *Apple* will. I mean, they *might*, but right now I think it's just wishful thinking.
After all, Dell sells cheapo stripped down boxes for a couple hundred bucks, but you don't see Apple doing it. Just because *a* company will produce the product, doesn't mean *Apple* will produce the product.
I dunno, I mean, if they can pull something out of their hat that makes it an OMG different beast, then yeah, they might go for it. But I don't see them doing it if they're going to be Just Another Company in that market. It's just not the Apple way of doing things.
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
Vinea
I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here.
OTOH, an add-on iTV box that works with any screen out there, *that* would be a big hit, IMO.
I mean, maybe they'll pull it off, but my nose says no.
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
I'm always amazed at how people on forums think they are the average consumer. We aren't.
The time for a company to move to other product categories is when both it, as a brand, and the category, are hot. Both of those two prescriptions are true now.
When I buy my next hi def set, I would carefully consider an Apple branded model, if they had one that fit my needs, before other brands. I' know I'm not the only one, because I've asked others that question.
There are commodity brands, mid priced brands, and lines, and hi end brands, and lines. ALL are selling well.
There is no reason to assume that Apple couldn't pick one or more areas to sell into, and be successful.
The tens of millions of iPod users who are looking forward to a new set would certainly consider one. After we credit them for selling more Mac's, a MUCH more difficult decision to make. An Apple Tv would be simple. People switch brands all the time. After all, they are all compatible, not like the situation with computer platforms.
And what about those Mac owners who have spent $1,000 or more for a new computer? If they are happy with their purchase, you can be sure they would consider one as well.
People like to stick with brands they like. If they don't like them they will switch easily. Unless everyone is happy with their current models, moving to an Apple model, which they already perceive as being better, would not be such a difficult decision.
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
Vinea
Hell, I can actually completely agree with you on this one.
Who's Sandwich Man?
Sandwich Man was a character in a story written by Jason O'Grady a year ago. Here's the story: Apple Plasma Displays to Rock MWSF
I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here.
OTOH, an add-on iTV box that works with any screen out there, *that* would be a big hit, IMO.
I mean, maybe they'll pull it off, but my nose says no.
That's what I think. Current Apple displays aren't cheap enough compared to other LCDs to expect that a TV would be. If on the other hand they had access to some nice new technology like SED or Laser then that's a whole other ballgame but I highly doubt it.
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
The *only* thing I'd point out here, since I have no idea whether they will, or they won't, is that this same reasoning has been used to state why Apple *MUST* jump into the econobox computer market, ala Dell. After all, it's a best selling category, so that alone would be enough reason... but we know that's not true.
I dunno. They may come out with one that's the Lexus end of things, but then they risk the same "Apple is expensive!" perception problem they have with the Macs. It just seems... not exactly *wrong* to my gut, but at least unright.
My guess is still that the iTV will be an inexpensive (relatively) add-on box for the average consumer to plop into their existing home theatre system, and *extend* the Mac experience. It won't be a full computer, it'll be just a gateway to the computer they already have. If it's Windows, it'll offer iTunes (music and video) integration. If it's a Mac, it'll offer a lot more, including, hopefully, the VNC-ish feature you mentioned.
Tying it into a $$$ display, however... doesn't feel right.
Now, if they do that projection display idea I threw around a couple years ago...
What does this thread have to do with Macworld? Shouldn't it be "Wu: Apple reportedly..."
ha ha, totally. Unless it's a possibility it'll be announced tomorrow.
I really hope I'm not let down after this event like I was at "Showtime". People expect too much from Apple and just end up disappointed.
Cheers
The *only* thing I'd point out here, since I have no idea whether they will, or they won't, is that this same reasoning has been used to state why Apple *MUST* jump into the econobox computer market, ala Dell. After all, it's a best selling category, so that alone would be enough reason... but we know that's not true.
I dunno. They may come out with one that's the Lexus end of things, but then they risk the same "Apple is expensive!" perception problem they have with the Macs. It just seems... not exactly *wrong* to my gut, but at least unright.
My guess is still that the iTV will be an inexpensive (relatively) add-on box for the average consumer to plop into their existing home theatre system, and *extend* the Mac experience. It won't be a full computer, it'll be just a gateway to the computer they already have. If it's Windows, it'll offer iTunes (music and video) integration. If it's a Mac, it'll offer a lot more, including, hopefully, the VNC-ish feature you mentioned.
Tying it into a $$$ display, however... doesn't feel right.
I don't see a problem with Apple coming out with "Lexus" pricing. It's what people expect, after all.
Companies have a history of first coming out with a premium product line. Once that line is established, and the agreement is that it is indeed premium, they then move to the next lower level, using the same branding. Then they move it still lower.
People will always associate the brand with the premium product line, and eye the less expensive versions as being of the same quality. Lexus itself has gone that way, as has Mercedes, and BMW.
It's more difficult to move the other way, as numerous brands have discovered. Cheap is going to be perceived as cheap for a long time.
I don't see a problem with Apple coming out with "Lexus" pricing. It's what people expect, after all.
I still don't see how this translates to Apple entering the high-end home display market, but... whatevva. I'm still perfectly willing to be surprised on this one.
Exactly.. guess which two people will be having the last laugh.
who??
//AAPL is beyond prototype on large-screen technologies (for a larger monitor or possibly Apple-branded HDTV),"//
well, there you go, if true, i was wrong, but i said as much elsewhere.
still, im not going to run out and replace my 50" with a 47" am i?
I think Jobs sees reality... that TVs are just big monitors... so this makes sense.
...
No, they're not. A 23" Apple Cinema Display can display a 1920 x 1080 HD image at full resolution with room to spare. A 30" ACD can display four (4) 1280 x 720 HD images at full resolution simultaneously with room to space. These is a feat which no HD monitor in this size category can match. As a computer monitor, the best consumer HDTV is a poor substitute. As TV sets, Apple Cinema Displays are at once too expensive and too small.
Several posters have already said this, but it bears repeating. Apple's entry into the TV market makes no economic sense. The price of flat panel displays is dropping like a stone. A lot of them are being sold, but the supply continues to outstrip demand by a wide margin. In addition to the usual consumer electronic stories, I can now walk into Wal-Mart, Office Depot, or CompUSA and walk out with an integrated LCD HDTV for about $600. I can get a 42" plasma screen integrated HDTV for about $1300. This represents a substantial drop from just 6 months ago.
The likes of Dell and HP entered this market because they have already saturated their primary customer base. They needed markets to expand into. OTOH, Apple's primary customer base is expanding. Entering the TV market is a desparate move that it does not need.
Mike from myallo.com
"I still don't see the advantage of selling the big display themselves. The big screen market is pretty cut throat - unless they can come up with some wacky new display technology, or some way of undercutting everyone else, there's no real market to be had here."
Both the Times and the WSJ stated that wide screen hi def Tv's were one of the biggest selling categories of products, and that the numbers would continue to rise.
That's enough reason for Apple to sell at least one or two.
Note that you just state the wide screen hi-defs a big sellers. The original quote is talking 'big screen' market. They aren't mutually inclusive. The sub-$1000 20-30" wide screens are extremely popular. But I don't know who'd call those 'Big-screen'.
Of course, for a company that espoused years ago about "the year of HD", you'd think they would've had ONE monitor that was HDTV compatible (i.e. HDMI port, or component video port, or something that would allow you to view HD content).
Note that you just state the wide screen hi-defs a big sellers. The original quote is talking 'big screen' market. They aren't mutually inclusive. The sub-$1000 20-30" wide screens are extremely popular. But I don't know who'd call those 'Big-screen'.
Of course, for a company that espoused years ago about "the year of HD", you'd think they would've had ONE monitor that was HDTV compatible (i.e. HDMI port, or component video port, or something that would allow you to view HD content).
They do. The computer. I don't think Apple is interested in people using their displays as a TV.
I don't see why Apple has to make big screen displays. Let the TV people do it! All Apple has to do is make things that shoot video out an HDMI port, then let us hook it to our TVs and stereos, no?
Mike from myallo.com
I think perhaps iTV is a tad too close to the AirPort Express which didn't exactly set the world on fire. A HDTV with iTV intergrated into it coupled with iTunes has a more iPodish potential. Not that Apple is going to corner the market on HDTVs but in terms of capturing mindshare a HDTV that only needs to be plugged into the power outlet that can do HD wirelessly has a level of panache that the rest of the market doesn't currently enjoy.
Vinea
The pro and con for Apple is that while MS has Dell/Gateway/HP to build MCE and MCXs Apple has to do it all itself. If Apple is making a play for the living room, and there's little reason to have an iTV otherwise, then if anyone is building a AIO then it has to be Apple.
The pro is that they control the entire ecosystem. The con is they have to build it themselves (at least this kind of integration). An Apple HDTV with iSight and iTV built in is a good thing for Apple to have in addition to standalone iSights and iTVs.
Given they have relationships with glass makers then building an Apple branded HDTV is no different than building Apple branded cinema displays. The reason to build a AIO HDTV with iTV built in is for the same reason they build monitors...to have the entire solution available.
Vinea
Excellent points, vinea. We would Apple make it's own monitors but then shy away from other monitors just because it has an integrated TV Tuner? Well, I certainly can't think of valid reason.
If anyone can pull off all this integration we have going on now, it's certainly Apple. I will gladly pay a little more for something that "just works"; and I doubt that I'm alone.