just remember you get to fulfill your promise about shutting up on this tired topic in about 13 months time, mind you, you will likely get a few dozen threads started on it between then and now, its almost funny.
Software, ease-of-use, ease-of-set-up, design, and yes, features.
But what features? It's a TV. Apple typically don't do the whole packing features in anyway. They're not going to put an Apple TV in there for the reasons I mentioned.
Also how difficult is a TV to set up? My TV, which I never use any more was basically plug it in, hook up the SCART to the freeview box and it's done.
The reason that I don't use my TV is not because my TV is rubbish but there's hardly anything on TV worth watching including TV shows, movie repeats etc. The reason I don't have an Apple TV is that it basically has the same stuff but you have to pay for every single item.
Is Apple also going to accommodate for analog TV or digital-only? What about cable providers? They've never done any of this before and have shown no interest in the market whatsoever. They don't even have BTO TV tuners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
The screen technology itself won't be better than the competition (i.e. Sammy and Panny).
Then it's not state-of-the-art. Software alone doesn't define state-of-the-art.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
the screen tech on the iPhone isn't revolutionary. The software and design is.
The screen tech still only came out in the last year or two. TV technology is old. Apple cannot come out with a plasma or LCD when laser TVs are coming out:
If I am right, what do you think they could do to make this TV appealing to the general public, those folks who like that something special, and for those who have trouble working a toaster?
For people who can't work a toaster, they have staff to set up the TV for them. An Apple TV wouldn't be any easier to work from their perspective.
For people who can't work a toaster, they have staff to set up the TV for them. An Apple TV wouldn't be any easier to work from their perspective.
Ouch! Good argument.
I guarantee you they would find it easier to use. People in general would be like: "It's so simple." And: "Do you remember when TV's used to come with manuals. - At least now if we get stuck, I can call Apple and they talk it though step by step on the phone. Much better this way".
I wish you could see what I see. Frankly, this is similar to the discussion I was having with a few people here about Apple getting into the phone business. People just couldn't see it. To me it's obvious though. Of course those same folks now would tell me that: "yeah, but the phone business is different though." A phone is not a TV yeah, but that's not the point here.
P.S. I'm not doing this thread so people would be like: "Ireland was right after all." When it happens. I'm doing it because I think it's obvious and I'm looking for people to start seeing that. I'm not looking for justification for my viewpoint. I'm looking for people who see what I see, cause I can see it before me.
I'm not so sure the day-to-day use of a TV has as much, or any, room for user interface revolutionizing as the cellphone market had. The thing with celsphones is that by and large, their menus are cryptic and confusing and just basic use can turn into a chore. Most TVs are simple enough to use on a daily basis. The set-up can be confusing as all hell, I'll agree to that, but this is only done once. And I'm not sure this would be enough of a selling point. There's room for refinement, sure, but is this enough of a incentive for Apple to try to break into a market that is highly competitive, has low margins and that they have never shown much of an interest in before?
Yeah, phones needed improvement, TVs don't really need much improvement at all as their function is basic. Apple take complex products that really need improvement and make people go 'wow, why the hell has no one thought of this before'. With a TV, it would be more like, 'great, that's all we need, another brand to choose from'.
One area Apple would do well to revolutionize is the transport industry. Imagine if Apple used all their billions to bring the energy efficient icar to the mass market:
People are being killed for fossil fuel resources. This is way more important than satisfying the whims of couch potatoes. I want to drive a car like KIT from Knight Rider but maybe with OS X system voice vicki. Watch this video and imagine this is your icar:
The theme tune would be playing on your integrated ipod/iphone audio system.
Having to send your car back to Apple under warranty might be a slight problem but I'm sure they'll come up with something. Everybody needs transport and they are all computerized - that market isn't dying anytime soon. They are extremely complicated and it takes months for someone to learn how to drive them so there are so many things Apple could do there.
With the fuel cell technology, they bring it to laptops and mobile devices and there you go, Apple has not only brought state of the art tech to the masses but completely removed the world's reliance on fossil fuels.
That's my proposition to Steve Jobs, do you want to sell computers for the rest of your life or do you want to change the world (again)?
Seriously though, it's a touch computer and I actually just thought of a way they can do pressure sensitivity really easily. It's all in the pen of course. A special pen that works on capacitive screens just has to have a springy nib. This way you get all the accuracy of finger-based interaction as well as the flexibility for drawing that a wacom has.
Think that Apple and Pixar have close ties. How are their drawing artists sharing their work? With a wacom hooked to a laptop, which has a screen and a keyboard. How about just a screen?
Even the cheapest wacoms are almost the same price as Apple's lowest laptop. It's the only model of computer they don't have besides well, y'know. There have been an awful lot of touch-based desktops around recently from PC manufacturers and they usually clamor to be ahead of Apple only to be kicked in the balls when Apple release their product.
If Apple don't release a touch-based computer, I will eat my own stool. Well, it'll have to be my couch as I don't have a stool.
The only question I have is what will they call it? iTouch sounds pretty cool. Or maybe TouchMe to go with MobileMe.
I can't believe itouch.com is available as a domain name.
Though newton.com is still owned by Apple and expires on the 28th October this year. It was renewed in April this year. Why would they keep renewing a product discontinued years ago? They don't do that with any of their other products.
Yeah, phones needed improvement, TVs don't really need much improvement at all as their function is basic. Apple take complex products that really need improvement and make people go 'wow, why the hell has no one thought of this before'. With a TV, it would be more like, 'great, that's all we need, another brand to choose from'.
Or: yeah Apple now make sweet looking, easy-to-use TV's with sexy user interfaces. They are even super-easy to set up. And.. can you download a movie, song, music video or TV Show right to the TV, right out of the box. You can literally pick nearly any show. Even old classics.
Combine that with new Apple iTunes TV show subscription service and you've got a potential replacement for cable, literally. And it clears up your entertainment centre. Leaving just a TV, and maybe a PS3 or something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
If Apple don't release a touch-based computer, I will eat my own stool. Well, it'll have to be my couch as I don't have a stool.
The only question I have is what will they call it? iTouch sounds pretty cool. Or maybe TouchMe to go with MobileMe.
I can't believe itouch.com is available as a domain name.
Whois for iTouch.com:
Record expires on 27-Aug-2014.
Record created on 28-Aug-1995.
So no, it's not available.
And they'll call that tablet Mac touch. An iPod with touch is called iPod touch, a Mac with touch will be called Mac touch - not to be confused with iPod touch (iTouch).
-------------------------
Beating a dead horse? Oh shut up. If you don't think Apple is eyeing this space, then, in my opinion you are either stupid or naive, or you just can't see the bigger picture for where Apple are going.
They want the living room, the TV is the fucking living room.
Beating a dead horse? Oh shut up. If you don't think Apple is eyeing this space, then, in my opinion you are either stupid or naive, or you just can't see the bigger picture for where Apple are going.
They want the living room, the TV is the fucking living room.
isn't this the equivalent of throwing a tantrum?
still more people disagree with you and you start calling them stupid.
you say its gonna be plasma, its gonna be leading edge, then its gonna be LCD, then "probably" OLED.
You invite people to agree with you, and offer nothing as evidence to back up your "clear vision" if your vision is so "clear" then why can't you tell us CLEARLY instead of resorting to name calling.
but the very fact that you appear to be a lone voice suggests that the "vision" is either very impaired or not actually all that clear after all.
--
I'll bite and ask, if a TV set gets set up once and any I've set up in the last ten plus years have had auto search, how can auto search be improved if the customer just ends up calling apple support, as you suggest above, ANYWAY?
what is to improve with "channel up, channel down" and amazingly enough "volume up and volume down" oh yeah, and that user minefield of a horrible experience the "On/Off" button
Maybe you see the digital switchover as being important, but then which countries broadcast standards do apple adopt? all of them?
and why would they want to compete against the job of SELLING AND MAKING PROFIT from TV shows and movies in iTMS? Why let the apple customer watch for free, when you can make money by "allowing" them to pay for the same content.
but then I don't expect you to address any of this, because you never do any time its asked.
The trouble is it's tricky to hear me sell you it, but I could show you. Look at good plasma and LCD side-by-side and you'll just get it for yourself. That and I know that jobs prefers plasmas, he's mentioned it, and I believe he has them in his house.
The trouble is it's tricky to hear me sell you it, but I could show you. Look at good plasma and LCD side-by-side and you'll just get it for yourself. That and I know that jobs prefers plasmas, he's mentioned it, and I believe he has them in his house.
I year ago I spent hours comparing TVs in multiple stores. Kept coming back to the plasma and I haven't looked back. For a very bright room I'd probably choose an LCD.
still more people disagree with you and you start calling them stupid.
A small bit of an over-simplification of my comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe
I'll bite and ask, if a TV set gets set up once and any I've set up in the last ten plus years have had auto search, how can auto search be improved if the customer just ends up calling apple support, as you suggest above, ANYWAY?
I mentioned that specifically for that small few who are "afraid" of technology. Not the average person. Most of the average would like the easy-of-use and the simple, beautiful flowing user-interface Apple would no doubt do. All TV interfaces are let's face it; ugly. This is a good starting point for Apple. And you say TV's are easy to set-up, and are only done once? Well computers are only set-up once (within reason) nowadays too. Apple could not only make it simple, but welcoming. And they could include internet and iTunes integration with some sort of subscription service, so users would not even need a set-top-box, or need to get someone to set that up. Thus, even more simplicity. There is in fact big room for improvement in this space, just most have accepted the usual "hassles" associated with this thing. The more tech savvy don't see the hassles, but be sure, lots of people do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe
what is to improve with "channel up, channel down" and amazingly enough "volume up and volume down" oh yeah, and that user minefield of a horrible experience the "On/Off" button
This is why I can appear pissed off when I reply to you. You're a smart ass*.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe
Maybe you see the digital switchover as being important, but then which countries broadcast standards do apple adopt? all of them?
iTunes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe
and why would they want to compete against the job of SELLING AND MAKING PROFIT from TV shows and movies in iTMS? Why let the apple customer watch for free, when you can make money by "allowing" them to pay for the same content.
Subscription based TV service. You might be surprised how the funds could add up for them, if they implemented it the right way, and charged the "right price". Continuous, and monthly. And if done right, they would get a lot more adopters than they ever would selling shows individually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe
but then I don't expect you to address any of this, because you never do any time its asked.
Comments
Am I the only one who chuckled at that?
I'm not really that interested in a close examination of Apple's stool.
..its almost funny.
Almost, kind of like you.
I'm not really that interested in a close examination of Apple's stool.
Software, ease-of-use, ease-of-set-up, design, and yes, features.
But what features? It's a TV. Apple typically don't do the whole packing features in anyway. They're not going to put an Apple TV in there for the reasons I mentioned.
Also how difficult is a TV to set up? My TV, which I never use any more was basically plug it in, hook up the SCART to the freeview box and it's done.
The reason that I don't use my TV is not because my TV is rubbish but there's hardly anything on TV worth watching including TV shows, movie repeats etc. The reason I don't have an Apple TV is that it basically has the same stuff but you have to pay for every single item.
Is Apple also going to accommodate for analog TV or digital-only? What about cable providers? They've never done any of this before and have shown no interest in the market whatsoever. They don't even have BTO TV tuners.
The screen technology itself won't be better than the competition (i.e. Sammy and Panny).
Then it's not state-of-the-art. Software alone doesn't define state-of-the-art.
the screen tech on the iPhone isn't revolutionary. The software and design is.
The screen tech still only came out in the last year or two. TV technology is old. Apple cannot come out with a plasma or LCD when laser TVs are coming out:
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/0...08-mitsub.html
Assume for second that I am correct
I don't make assumptions that big.
If I am right, what do you think they could do to make this TV appealing to the general public, those folks who like that something special, and for those who have trouble working a toaster?
For people who can't work a toaster, they have staff to set up the TV for them. An Apple TV wouldn't be any easier to work from their perspective.
I'm not really that interested in a close examination of Apple's stool.
So, not a "true" fanboy then
For people who can't work a toaster, they have staff to set up the TV for them. An Apple TV wouldn't be any easier to work from their perspective.
Ouch! Good argument.
I guarantee you they would find it easier to use. People in general would be like: "It's so simple." And: "Do you remember when TV's used to come with manuals. - At least now if we get stuck, I can call Apple and they talk it though step by step on the phone. Much better this way".
I wish you could see what I see. Frankly, this is similar to the discussion I was having with a few people here about Apple getting into the phone business. People just couldn't see it. To me it's obvious though. Of course those same folks now would tell me that: "yeah, but the phone business is different though." A phone is not a TV yeah, but that's not the point here.
P.S. I'm not doing this thread so people would be like: "Ireland was right after all." When it happens. I'm doing it because I think it's obvious and I'm looking for people to start seeing that. I'm not looking for justification for my viewpoint. I'm looking for people who see what I see, cause I can see it before me.
move on.
One area Apple would do well to revolutionize is the transport industry. Imagine if Apple used all their billions to bring the energy efficient icar to the mass market:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qow9r5yhhBo
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/0...ws-off-hy.html
People are being killed for fossil fuel resources. This is way more important than satisfying the whims of couch potatoes. I want to drive a car like KIT from Knight Rider but maybe with OS X system voice vicki. Watch this video and imagine this is your icar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbJDP0kzhtg
The theme tune would be playing on your integrated ipod/iphone audio system.
Having to send your car back to Apple under warranty might be a slight problem but I'm sure they'll come up with something. Everybody needs transport and they are all computerized - that market isn't dying anytime soon. They are extremely complicated and it takes months for someone to learn how to drive them so there are so many things Apple could do there.
With the fuel cell technology, they bring it to laptops and mobile devices and there you go, Apple has not only brought state of the art tech to the masses but completely removed the world's reliance on fossil fuels.
That's my proposition to Steve Jobs, do you want to sell computers for the rest of your life or do you want to change the world (again)?
Seriously though, it's a touch computer and I actually just thought of a way they can do pressure sensitivity really easily. It's all in the pen of course. A special pen that works on capacitive screens just has to have a springy nib. This way you get all the accuracy of finger-based interaction as well as the flexibility for drawing that a wacom has.
Think that Apple and Pixar have close ties. How are their drawing artists sharing their work? With a wacom hooked to a laptop, which has a screen and a keyboard. How about just a screen?
Even the cheapest wacoms are almost the same price as Apple's lowest laptop. It's the only model of computer they don't have besides well, y'know. There have been an awful lot of touch-based desktops around recently from PC manufacturers and they usually clamor to be ahead of Apple only to be kicked in the balls when Apple release their product.
If Apple don't release a touch-based computer, I will eat my own stool. Well, it'll have to be my couch as I don't have a stool.
The only question I have is what will they call it? iTouch sounds pretty cool. Or maybe TouchMe to go with MobileMe.
I can't believe itouch.com is available as a domain name.
Though newton.com is still owned by Apple and expires on the 28th October this year. It was renewed in April this year. Why would they keep renewing a product discontinued years ago? They don't do that with any of their other products.
some people just don't get tired of beating a dead horse.
move on.
Move on to what? Where? You move on.
Yeah, phones needed improvement, TVs don't really need much improvement at all as their function is basic. Apple take complex products that really need improvement and make people go 'wow, why the hell has no one thought of this before'. With a TV, it would be more like, 'great, that's all we need, another brand to choose from'.
Or: yeah Apple now make sweet looking, easy-to-use TV's with sexy user interfaces. They are even super-easy to set up. And.. can you download a movie, song, music video or TV Show right to the TV, right out of the box. You can literally pick nearly any show. Even old classics.
Combine that with new Apple iTunes TV show subscription service and you've got a potential replacement for cable, literally. And it clears up your entertainment centre. Leaving just a TV, and maybe a PS3 or something.
If Apple don't release a touch-based computer, I will eat my own stool. Well, it'll have to be my couch as I don't have a stool.
The only question I have is what will they call it? iTouch sounds pretty cool. Or maybe TouchMe to go with MobileMe.
I can't believe itouch.com is available as a domain name.
Whois for iTouch.com:
Record expires on 27-Aug-2014.
Record created on 28-Aug-1995.
So no, it's not available.
And they'll call that tablet Mac touch. An iPod with touch is called iPod touch, a Mac with touch will be called Mac touch - not to be confused with iPod touch (iTouch).
-------------------------
Beating a dead horse? Oh shut up. If you don't think Apple is eyeing this space, then, in my opinion you are either stupid or naive, or you just can't see the bigger picture for where Apple are going.
They want the living room, the TV is the fucking living room.
Beating a dead horse? Oh shut up. If you don't think Apple is eyeing this space, then, in my opinion you are either stupid or naive, or you just can't see the bigger picture for where Apple are going.
They want the living room, the TV is the fucking living room.
isn't this the equivalent of throwing a tantrum?
still more people disagree with you and you start calling them stupid.
you say its gonna be plasma, its gonna be leading edge, then its gonna be LCD, then "probably" OLED.
You invite people to agree with you, and offer nothing as evidence to back up your "clear vision" if your vision is so "clear" then why can't you tell us CLEARLY instead of resorting to name calling.
but the very fact that you appear to be a lone voice suggests that the "vision" is either very impaired or not actually all that clear after all.
--
I'll bite and ask, if a TV set gets set up once and any I've set up in the last ten plus years have had auto search, how can auto search be improved if the customer just ends up calling apple support, as you suggest above, ANYWAY?
what is to improve with "channel up, channel down" and amazingly enough "volume up and volume down" oh yeah, and that user minefield of a horrible experience the "On/Off" button
Maybe you see the digital switchover as being important, but then which countries broadcast standards do apple adopt? all of them?
and why would they want to compete against the job of SELLING AND MAKING PROFIT from TV shows and movies in iTMS? Why let the apple customer watch for free, when you can make money by "allowing" them to pay for the same content.
but then I don't expect you to address any of this, because you never do any time its asked.
When it comes to the reasons for Apple to be going into the TV business, I see many.
Apple could be the first company to really bring the flexibility of the computer to the TV,
with Safari, iChat, Mail, iTunes and most importantly an App Store. It could all be controlled
by a touch remote, also usable as a game controller. Apple could sell games grand scale..
This in addition to maybe have a subscription based movie and TV show alternative.
When Apple launched the iPhone it was revolutionary, not because they were the first to launch a mobile phone, but because they re-invented it.
This could very much be something they are looking to do with the TV, since next to the computer and
phone it´s the electronic product people use the most.
But will they simply enhance the current AppleTV, or will they make a true TV. I don´t know,
and if they do it probably won´t be for a while since there would be a rumor explosion about it.
Never the less, Apple is of course looking at their possibilities in the living room, and the TV is a
possible candidate for re-inventing..
In what way would this be a TRANSITION?
OK, I'll take a nibble on this one:
In what way would this be a TRANSITION?
To the world of TV's, it's a company product transition.
I still want to hear you sell me Plasma over LCD.
The trouble is it's tricky to hear me sell you it, but I could show you. Look at good plasma and LCD side-by-side and you'll just get it for yourself. That and I know that jobs prefers plasmas, he's mentioned it, and I believe he has them in his house.
The trouble is it's tricky to hear me sell you it, but I could show you. Look at good plasma and LCD side-by-side and you'll just get it for yourself. That and I know that jobs prefers plasmas, he's mentioned it, and I believe he has them in his house.
I year ago I spent hours comparing TVs in multiple stores. Kept coming back to the plasma and I haven't looked back. For a very bright room I'd probably choose an LCD.
isn't this the equivalent of throwing a tantrum?
No.
still more people disagree with you and you start calling them stupid.
A small bit of an over-simplification of my comment.
I'll bite and ask, if a TV set gets set up once and any I've set up in the last ten plus years have had auto search, how can auto search be improved if the customer just ends up calling apple support, as you suggest above, ANYWAY?
I mentioned that specifically for that small few who are "afraid" of technology. Not the average person. Most of the average would like the easy-of-use and the simple, beautiful flowing user-interface Apple would no doubt do. All TV interfaces are let's face it; ugly. This is a good starting point for Apple. And you say TV's are easy to set-up, and are only done once? Well computers are only set-up once (within reason) nowadays too. Apple could not only make it simple, but welcoming. And they could include internet and iTunes integration with some sort of subscription service, so users would not even need a set-top-box, or need to get someone to set that up. Thus, even more simplicity. There is in fact big room for improvement in this space, just most have accepted the usual "hassles" associated with this thing. The more tech savvy don't see the hassles, but be sure, lots of people do.
what is to improve with "channel up, channel down" and amazingly enough "volume up and volume down" oh yeah, and that user minefield of a horrible experience the "On/Off" button
This is why I can appear pissed off when I reply to you. You're a smart ass*.
Maybe you see the digital switchover as being important, but then which countries broadcast standards do apple adopt? all of them?
iTunes.
and why would they want to compete against the job of SELLING AND MAKING PROFIT from TV shows and movies in iTMS? Why let the apple customer watch for free, when you can make money by "allowing" them to pay for the same content.
Subscription based TV service. You might be surprised how the funds could add up for them, if they implemented it the right way, and charged the "right price". Continuous, and monthly. And if done right, they would get a lot more adopters than they ever would selling shows individually.
but then I don't expect you to address any of this, because you never do any time its asked.
*See: smart ass.