An all-in-one TV would seem to be a nightmare that almost nobody would want. Unless maybe it had some sort of pop-out module that could be replaced. I know I would never want something like that. I've gone through about three computers in the time it took for a Sony TV I had that lasted nearly 20 years. I'm content just to have another box sitting alongside or below my TV set.
I'd welcome a AppleTV with recording capabilities and built-in tuner, but basically the mix of my Apple MacMini, Plextor ConvertX and TimeWarner cablebox/DVR suffice. If I could get them all into one unit it would make life and electricity usage much easier.
I still have my doubts that Apple will make a full fledged TV.
I'd love to see what they could do but conventional wisdom seems to suggest that
they'd simply be happy making the ancillary devices for the TV.
I agree. Apple will never make an integrated TV... maybe a HDTV display, but incorporating it all together, never.
Simply because TV's have way to long of a expected life span for a software company to support sufficently. People are accustomed to replacing computer hardware every few years, the are not accustomed to replacing TV's, DVD Players, VCR Players, etc.... So while a consumer will tolerate that his 5 y.o. AppleTV doesn't have the power to utilize the latest streaming video codecs and replace it, nobody is going to tolerate their 5 year TV being made obsolete.
Great quality thoughts here. Not any clear answers of course because there are none.
I think a number of posters here could beat "analysts".
So here's my "Analyst Greg" thoughts.
Apple wants:
Apple wants a single box that allows us to choose what we want to watch, then download over the net to watch that immediately. Absolute choice and good quality. A choice of the big ticket programs, independent productions, your own content, and your friends. It wants to make money on both the content and the hardware.
They don't want to re-purpose the old systems, don't want to stick to what they see as antiquated 'linear' broadcast format or encourage physical media.
(BTW: Although Apple might not agree, I sometimes think Steve has a pet peeve against subscription for TV or Music, eg: paying $100/mth for 300 channels of which you only watch 3.)
The content producers want:
They want to increase returns on advertising, to make money from the same consumer on the same content by having them pay multiple times (from Cinema seats, DVD sales, rentals, PPV, and FTA advertising). They also want to keep their licensees happy (the networks, individual channels, DVD/BD makers etc)
The networks fear Apple taking too much control - the networks are well known brands. Their licensee channels want exclusivity. The DVD/BD makers fear an online future. The result is they want to keep the status quo... and Apple really wants to break the status quo.
The result now:
Unfortunately, it's a stand off. Apple can sell TV shows (which is largely a NEW place the networks can make money) but not rent them (which would earn them far less and transfer revenue from FTA/ads to rental... so no obvious benefit to them). Apple can rent movies in the same window as PPV, which doesn't encroach on the premium movie channels or other money-making windows.
It could do much more if the networks took a leap of faith.
Small proviso: The internet is just catching up to the bandwidth needs
Plausible changes for AppleTV:
*DVR (Free to air)
*DVD
*Bluray
*DVR+Cable Card (or CI satellite card)
*Broader deals with other providers (eg: offer Amazon movies if the movie isn't on AppleTV).
*... and for all the above - centralised media management/storage/hub.
Remember Apple doesn't like physical media or linear TV - as palegolas put it, they're idealistic.
Then there are payment models of advertising, renting, buying, or subscribing which could make a difference.
The future as I see it:
The existing AppleTV could just continue it's slow increase in market share, particularly if other financial models appear. For example, some premium movie networks offer downloads now, so a subscription to "Showtime" or "Encore" may become possible without any change to AppleTV. Apple would need a few big players to get a critical mass - imagine if Discovery put all their content online for a cheap price. Movies, comedy, kids.. I guess Disney is the most plausible candidate.
If Apple got such subscription content, I think that might be enough to really launch the AppleTV.
To the future - I see the next AppleTV in 2 flavors:
1) A beefed up AppleTV much like the existing one. It needs to handle 1080p content from fta (elgato?) recordings, podcasts, and consumer video cameras. A bigger hard disk and upgraded software to handle a "Discovery" online portal etc (if they can negotiate that).
2) ApplePVR - I think Apple will need to offer a "classic TV" device. But they don't like linear TV, so perhaps they will abandon a "TV guide" and provide instead a list of upcoming programs to subscribe to & watch - it doesn't need to say what day or time the shows are on. In addition they can upsell people to iTunes store content, and show free content alongside their rentals.
* And a media server
Apple would MUCH rather offer rental of TV shows etc - but if the TV networks won't play then a PVR is a work around. It also bypasses problems with the Internet backbone being too slow. If the networks work with them, Apple could play nicely and keep the networks' branding, offer an "upgrade for 50c" to watch a show without ads (which gets mostly paid to the local channel), or replace the 8 "generic ads" with 2 "user-targeted ads".
I just don't see support for DVD (history!) or Bluray (not online!). I could be wrong - a "SUPER AppleTV" might even do it all... but they really want to move people to a new "any show, any time, all online" model. A PVR can be made to help people move towards that ideal, where Bluray does not move people towards the model at all. DVD playback could only be a bridge if they allowed us to convert all our old DVDs from physical media onto the media server.
What would an Apple television be, other than a panel with ATV capabilities built in? You can easily add the ATV now, so why would Apple want to get into the cuthroat flat panel market?
As well, why get involved in the mess of CableCards and dealing with regional cable companies and their dunderhead technical abilities?
I think the approach in this area would more be embedded systems - developing and licensing a customized Apple-built OS/Interface for cable or satellite boxes to entirely replace the horrid software on my Cablevision and DirecTV boxes. With network integration to your local computer content, ATV on a chip inside these devices, Apple could deliver the functionality side of the system, and let SciAtla or Motorola or whomever handle the physical cable/sat connectivity portion, the part that they do relatively well.
Embeded OS in cars, appliances, etc. It's dangerous, because Apple can no longer deliver and support the whole experience - but it's an interesting potential.
Most likely, a future version of AppleTV will be DVR ready and a TV option as an add-on from Apple, not an all or nothing solution. The TV will of course be able to connect to a general Mac.
Apple TV needs one more thing. If it's a DVR, that'd be awesome. A bluray player would be cool too.
I know that sounds backwards since Apple is fighting bluray, but perhaps they market it as an all in one rental device, and people soon realize that they don't need the bluray player at all, no trip to blockbuster, just sit on your ass and rent... the future is here and you have a bluray player if you need it. Someone said DVD... maybe, but I think that's over with, and bluray is probably going to happen. For a while anyway.
I just can't pay money for a device so that I can keep paying money to Apple. Put in something extra... DVR or BD.
Apple TV needs one more thing. If it's a DVR, that'd be awesome. A bluray player would be cool too.
I know that sounds backwards since Apple is fighting bluray, but perhaps they market it as an all in one rental device, and people soon realize that they don't need the bluray player at all, no trip to blockbuster, just sit on your ass and rent... the future is here and you have a bluray player if you need it. Someone said DVD... maybe, but I think that's over with, and bluray is probably going to happen. For a while anyway.
I just can't pay money for a device so that I can keep paying money to Apple. Put in something extra... DVR or BD.
Agree. Apple needs to not be too greedy and keep an eye on the long term. iTunes can still rip CDs, and yet Apple is now the largest seller of music. They need to so something to make the AppleTV more attractive to purchase, even if that means a short term reduction of content sales by including DVD, BD, or DVR (in descending order of likelihood). If they keep it such a limited device, it will take longer to get critical mass and give the competition more time to keep up or pull ahead. They need to focus on getting the hardware in living rooms and the rest will follow.
Great quality thoughts here. Not any clear answers of course because there are none.
I think a number of posters here could beat "analysts".
So here's my "Analyst Greg" thoughts.
Apple wants:
Apple wants a single box that allows us to choose what we want to watch, then download over the net to watch that immediately. Absolute choice and good quality. A choice of the big ticket programs, independent productions, your own content, and your friends. It wants to make money on both the content and the hardware.
They don't want to re-purpose the old systems, don't want to stick to what they see as antiquated 'linear' broadcast format or encourage physical media.
(BTW: Although Apple might not agree, I sometimes think Steve has a pet peeve against subscription for TV or Music, eg: paying $100/mth for 300 channels of which you only watch 3.)
The content producers want:
They want to increase returns on advertising, to make money from the same consumer on the same content by having them pay multiple times (from Cinema seats, DVD sales, rentals, PPV, and FTA advertising). They also want to keep their licensees happy (the networks, individual channels, DVD/BD makers etc)
The networks fear Apple taking too much control - the networks are well known brands. Their licensee channels want exclusivity. The DVD/BD makers fear an online future. The result is they want to keep the status quo... and Apple really wants to break the status quo.
The result now:
Unfortunately, it's a stand off. Apple can sell TV shows (which is largely a NEW place the networks can make money) but not rent them (which would earn them far less and transfer revenue from FTA/ads to rental... so no obvious benefit to them). Apple can rent movies in the same window as PPV, which doesn't encroach on the premium movie channels or other money-making windows.
It could do much more if the networks took a leap of faith.
Small proviso: The internet is just catching up to the bandwidth needs
Plausible changes for AppleTV:
*DVR (Free to air)
*DVD
*Bluray
*DVR+Cable Card (or CI satellite card)
*Broader deals with other providers (eg: offer Amazon movies if the movie isn't on AppleTV).
*... and for all the above - centralised media management/storage/hub.
Remember Apple doesn't like physical media or linear TV - as palegolas put it, they're idealistic.
Then there are payment models of advertising, renting, buying, or subscribing which could make a difference.
The future as I see it:
The existing AppleTV could just continue it's slow increase in market share, particularly if other financial models appear. For example, some premium movie networks offer downloads now, so a subscription to "Showtime" or "Encore" may become possible without any change to AppleTV. Apple would need a few big players to get a critical mass - imagine if Discovery put all their content online for a cheap price. Movies, comedy, kids.. I guess Disney is the most plausible candidate.
If Apple got such subscription content, I think that might be enough to really launch the AppleTV.
To the future - I see the next AppleTV in 2 flavors:
1) A beefed up AppleTV much like the existing one. It needs to handle 1080p content from fta (elgato?) recordings, podcasts, and consumer video cameras. A bigger hard disk and upgraded software to handle a "Discovery" online portal etc (if they can negotiate that).
2) ApplePVR - I think Apple will need to offer a "classic TV" device. But they don't like linear TV, so perhaps they will abandon a "TV guide" and provide instead a list of upcoming programs to subscribe to & watch - it doesn't need to say what day or time the shows are on. In addition they can upsell people to iTunes store content, and show free content alongside their rentals.
* And a media server
Apple would MUCH rather offer rental of TV shows etc - but if the TV networks won't play then a PVR is a work around. It also bypasses problems with the Internet backbone being too slow. If the networks work with them, Apple could play nicely and keep the networks' branding, offer an "upgrade for 50c" to watch a show without ads (which gets mostly paid to the local channel), or replace the 8 "generic ads" with 2 "user-targeted ads".
I just don't see support for DVD (history!) or Bluray (not online!). I could be wrong - a "SUPER AppleTV" might even do it all... but they really want to move people to a new "any show, any time, all online" model. A PVR can be made to help people move towards that ideal, where Bluray does not move people towards the model at all. DVD playback could only be a bridge if they allowed us to convert all our old DVDs from physical media onto the media server.
How will apple work with cable / direct tv on demand? That may have the same show free vs pay on itunes?
Cable card v1 is out as it is 1 way and does not work with SDV, PPV, VOD, and some other channels (some systems)
tru2way / OCAP forces apple to have to have to run cable co software on there box. and it may also have to use the build in cable modem for some stuff as well that And the itunes side may have to use the main home network and not work over the cable box only network.
Direct tv is likely out as they going with TIVO and there boxes to day can do some of what ATV can do.
I think it's a little short-sighted for Piper to make the leap from Apple TV + Apple software prowess = spending millions of dollars and resources to fully take on a market that doesn't meet any of Apple's primary sweet spots - simplifying complex computing, inhancing mobility, and beautifying ugliness.
Despite taking the word "computers" out of their name, Apple for the most part still just makes devices that rely on complex computing. Then they simplify and improve the interface and packaging to be extremely portable, contagious, cool, minimal and elegant. That's what they did with their first Macintosh and the iMac renaissance. The iPod similarly relied on the simplification of complex computing, portability, and beauty in an otherwise ugly and clumsy market. The iPhone as a smartphone, again relies on the same factors as the iPod.
In contrast, televisions only require a very basic computing interface; secondly, the current market doesn't suffer from ugly or clumsy brands, but is fully dripping with elegance and coolness. And thirdly, perhaps most importantly, TVs don't rely on portability or ergonomic intimacy as much as laptops, phones or even desktops. People buy a TV, mount it on a console or wall and it pretty much never moves again it's entire life. Not to mention, as society becomes more savvy with mobile devices and computers, TVs are likely to become more expendable to daily life than ever before.
I think Apple appropriately addressed it's potential in the market with their Apple TV device. And improving it to the extent of making it smaller or even more multi-functional would be more in Apple's interest than sticking it in an LG case with an Apple logo.
So the need for complex computing + relevance to daily life + a market hooked on bulkiness and in desperate need of beautiful minimalism + need for mobility = Apple's genius may be better received in the automotive industry?
I think it's a little short-sighted for Piper to make the leap from Apple TV + Apple software prowess = spending millions of dollars and resources to take on such a large and completely superfluous market such as television.
Despite taking the word "computers" out of their name, Apple for the most part still just makes devices that rely on complex computing. Then they simplify and improve the interface and packaging to be extremely portable, contagious, cool, minimal and elegant. That's what they did with their first Macintosh and then the iMac renaissance. The iPod similarly relied on the simplification of complex computing, portability, and beauty in an otherwise ugly and clumsy market. The iPhone, again relies on the same factors as the iPod.
In contrast, televisions only require a very basic computing interface; secondly, the current market doesn't suffer from ugly or clumsy brands, but is fully dripping with elegance and coolness. And thirdly, perhaps most importantly, TVs don't rely on portability or ergonomic intimacy the way laptops, phones or even desktops do. People buy a TV, mount it on a console or wall and it pretty much never moves again it's entire life. Not to mention, as society becomes more savvy with mobile devices and computers, TVs are likely to become more expendable to daily life than ever before.
I think Apple appropriately addressed it's potential in the market with their Apple TV device. And improving it to the extent of making it smaller or even more multi-functional would be more in Apple's interest than sticking it in an LG case with an Apple logo.
So the need for complex computing + relevance to daily life + a market in desperate need for beautiful minimalism + need for mobility = Apple's genius may be better received in the automotive industry?
Thank you Carlos!
For me the dream of Apple make a television and adding AppleTV to it it is just a waste of resources and money at this point in time IMHO.
AppleTV first has to become a major player on their market before Apple contemplates the idea to move into the HDTV display business.
Right now, Apple is having to overcame a major hurdle on the iTunes store. Networks and film studios learning from the music industry are not letting Apple have the tools to take the market like they did with music.
That's why we keep hearing AppleTV is a hobby from Cupertino. Once Apple figure out a way to make AppleTV a successful product like the iPod or iPhone, then we might eventually see them opening a range of products coming out that device, like a TV.
Keep in mind that the HDTV manufactures out there have incredible products with high quality and attractive prices. So really just adding an AppleTV to a display set would make it so much more attractive to the mass market?
I don't think so, first because we know, AppleTV by itself is not a big seller, second having a built-in product like AppleTV that can be obsolete every 2 years on a product that people tend to keep for long time (TVs) makes even less sense. Finally, Apple is aware about the incredible competition and lower profit margin of HDTV set market.
I could see Apple teaming up with AT&T UVerse to make this work. Having wall mounted my tv, I would love to just have an outlet and data connection behind my tv. I don't want any boxes cluttering up my living room. This new idea of all purpose apple tv would accomplish that. But UVerse is the only provider right now (that I know of) that can deliver service without coaxial lines.
I could see Apple teaming up with AT&T UVerse to make this work. Having wall mounted my tv, I would love to just have an outlet and data connection behind my tv. I don't want any boxes cluttering up my living room. This new idea of all purpose apple tv would accomplish that. But UVerse is the only provider right now (that I know of) that can deliver service without coaxial lines.
I'm OK with having some boxes cluttering up my living room. But what I won't have is one box for cable/satellite, one box for DVD/blu-ray, one box for AppleTV, and possibly yet another box for content that Apple's closed/limited AppleTV can't handle. I also don't want it all in one box (or TV) for the same reason I probably wouldn't ever buy a Time Capsule. One part breaks and your whole system is dead.
TiVo used to partner with other box makers to produce combination TiVo/DVD players. If someone would make one of those, at the right price, with blu-ray, you could replace your cable box and disc player. That would clear room on the shelf for AppleTV. Or if Apple adds blu-ray (or even DVD) to AppleTV, same end result. The point is, something's got to go to make room for something new due to shelf space, number of available inputs, and aesthetics.
How will apple work with cable / direct tv on demand? That may have the same show free vs pay on itunes?
You're right that my reasoning for a PVR doesn't include cable.
For 3 reasons
1) it's difficult for Apple to implement
2) a lot of the major shows are on FTA
3) if they're trying to get people away from the linear TV model, dropping their cable subscription but keeping their FTA offerings (and perhaps spending a bunch of money on iTunes) could be the first step.
Quote:
Cable card v1 is out as it is 1 way and does not work with SDV, PPV, VOD, and some other channels (some systems)
As above, IF Apple made a cable card PVR, I don't think they'd care if it didn't work with the cable companies pay per view or Video on demand... they want iTunes to be used. The rest is a valid point.
Quote:
tru2way / OCAP forces apple to have to have to run cable co software on there box. and it may also have to use the build in cable modem for some stuff as well that And the itunes side may have to use the main home network and not work over the cable box only network.
Direct tv is likely out as they going with TIVO and there boxes to day can do some of what ATV can do.
Most of all I'd like to see the AppleTV support 3rd party software (for any apps) - such that an ISP, Cable company, or IPTV company could write player software to their offerings. If it requires cable hardware things get much more complicated as you've noted - standards are changing, satellite is also a big player, and we haven't considered outside the US at all.
CNN has a story, "More turning to Web to watch TV, movies". It talks about how more and more people are watching shows online as a way to reduce or eliminate their cable bill.
The interesting thing...they mention Hulu, Joost, Netflix, and Roku (a set-top box to watch Netflix on your TV instead of your computer), but not a single mention of Apple, iTunes, or AppleTV.
Gene Munster needs to put down the crack pipe.... I'm waiting for iTunes radio and these guys are hung up on DVR and cable boxes... Why would apple allow you to record content for free that they currently sell?
Because some consumers may not purchase their device unless it has DVR capability. Apple is still the major beneficiary if Apple TV content is a mix of free to air and itunes store. I see on-demand and timelapsed content as different but complementary markets.
CNN has a story, "More turning to Web to watch TV, movies". It talks about how more and more people are watching shows online as a way to reduce or eliminate their cable bill.
The interesting thing...they mention Hulu, Joost, Netflix, and Roku (a set-top box to watch Netflix on your TV instead of your computer), but not a single mention of Apple, iTunes, or AppleTV.
IMHO the single biggest improvement that Apple can make to the AppleTV is to open it up so that you can add Hulu, Joost, Netflix and BBC players to it. It already functions as an interface between your computer and TV. The next step is to make it the interface between the net and your TV.
Comments
I'd welcome a AppleTV with recording capabilities and built-in tuner, but basically the mix of my Apple MacMini, Plextor ConvertX and TimeWarner cablebox/DVR suffice. If I could get them all into one unit it would make life and electricity usage much easier.
I still have my doubts that Apple will make a full fledged TV.
I'd love to see what they could do but conventional wisdom seems to suggest that
they'd simply be happy making the ancillary devices for the TV.
I agree. Apple will never make an integrated TV... maybe a HDTV display, but incorporating it all together, never.
Simply because TV's have way to long of a expected life span for a software company to support sufficently. People are accustomed to replacing computer hardware every few years, the are not accustomed to replacing TV's, DVD Players, VCR Players, etc.... So while a consumer will tolerate that his 5 y.o. AppleTV doesn't have the power to utilize the latest streaming video codecs and replace it, nobody is going to tolerate their 5 year TV being made obsolete.
LOL. 42 and 50 inch screens are too small for a Home Theater, and keep dreaming about that HD-DVD drive. LOL.
A) He said he made the mockup a few years ago hence the HD-DVD.
C) It would be dead simple to add AppleTV functionality to an HDTV.
I think a number of posters here could beat "analysts".
So here's my "Analyst Greg" thoughts.
Apple wants:
Apple wants a single box that allows us to choose what we want to watch, then download over the net to watch that immediately. Absolute choice and good quality. A choice of the big ticket programs, independent productions, your own content, and your friends. It wants to make money on both the content and the hardware.
They don't want to re-purpose the old systems, don't want to stick to what they see as antiquated 'linear' broadcast format or encourage physical media.
(BTW: Although Apple might not agree, I sometimes think Steve has a pet peeve against subscription for TV or Music, eg: paying $100/mth for 300 channels of which you only watch 3.)
The content producers want:
They want to increase returns on advertising, to make money from the same consumer on the same content by having them pay multiple times (from Cinema seats, DVD sales, rentals, PPV, and FTA advertising). They also want to keep their licensees happy (the networks, individual channels, DVD/BD makers etc)
The networks fear Apple taking too much control - the networks are well known brands. Their licensee channels want exclusivity. The DVD/BD makers fear an online future. The result is they want to keep the status quo... and Apple really wants to break the status quo.
The result now:
Unfortunately, it's a stand off. Apple can sell TV shows (which is largely a NEW place the networks can make money) but not rent them (which would earn them far less and transfer revenue from FTA/ads to rental... so no obvious benefit to them). Apple can rent movies in the same window as PPV, which doesn't encroach on the premium movie channels or other money-making windows.
It could do much more if the networks took a leap of faith.
Small proviso: The internet is just catching up to the bandwidth needs
Plausible changes for AppleTV:
*DVR (Free to air)
*DVD
*Bluray
*DVR+Cable Card (or CI satellite card)
*Broader deals with other providers (eg: offer Amazon movies if the movie isn't on AppleTV).
*... and for all the above - centralised media management/storage/hub.
Remember Apple doesn't like physical media or linear TV - as palegolas put it, they're idealistic.
Then there are payment models of advertising, renting, buying, or subscribing which could make a difference.
The future as I see it:
The existing AppleTV could just continue it's slow increase in market share, particularly if other financial models appear. For example, some premium movie networks offer downloads now, so a subscription to "Showtime" or "Encore" may become possible without any change to AppleTV. Apple would need a few big players to get a critical mass - imagine if Discovery put all their content online for a cheap price. Movies, comedy, kids.. I guess Disney is the most plausible candidate.
If Apple got such subscription content, I think that might be enough to really launch the AppleTV.
To the future - I see the next AppleTV in 2 flavors:
1) A beefed up AppleTV much like the existing one. It needs to handle 1080p content from fta (elgato?) recordings, podcasts, and consumer video cameras. A bigger hard disk and upgraded software to handle a "Discovery" online portal etc (if they can negotiate that).
2) ApplePVR - I think Apple will need to offer a "classic TV" device. But they don't like linear TV, so perhaps they will abandon a "TV guide" and provide instead a list of upcoming programs to subscribe to & watch - it doesn't need to say what day or time the shows are on. In addition they can upsell people to iTunes store content, and show free content alongside their rentals.
* And a media server
Apple would MUCH rather offer rental of TV shows etc - but if the TV networks won't play then a PVR is a work around. It also bypasses problems with the Internet backbone being too slow. If the networks work with them, Apple could play nicely and keep the networks' branding, offer an "upgrade for 50c" to watch a show without ads (which gets mostly paid to the local channel), or replace the 8 "generic ads" with 2 "user-targeted ads".
I just don't see support for DVD (history!) or Bluray (not online!). I could be wrong - a "SUPER AppleTV" might even do it all... but they really want to move people to a new "any show, any time, all online" model. A PVR can be made to help people move towards that ideal, where Bluray does not move people towards the model at all. DVD playback could only be a bridge if they allowed us to convert all our old DVDs from physical media onto the media server.
As well, why get involved in the mess of CableCards and dealing with regional cable companies and their dunderhead technical abilities?
I think the approach in this area would more be embedded systems - developing and licensing a customized Apple-built OS/Interface for cable or satellite boxes to entirely replace the horrid software on my Cablevision and DirecTV boxes. With network integration to your local computer content, ATV on a chip inside these devices, Apple could deliver the functionality side of the system, and let SciAtla or Motorola or whomever handle the physical cable/sat connectivity portion, the part that they do relatively well.
Embeded OS in cars, appliances, etc. It's dangerous, because Apple can no longer deliver and support the whole experience - but it's an interesting potential.
Most likely, a future version of AppleTV will be DVR ready and a TV option as an add-on from Apple, not an all or nothing solution. The TV will of course be able to connect to a general Mac.
It would be nice to see some real headlines instead of hit grabbers...
Maybe if you stopped reading and posting on such threads...
I know that sounds backwards since Apple is fighting bluray, but perhaps they market it as an all in one rental device, and people soon realize that they don't need the bluray player at all, no trip to blockbuster, just sit on your ass and rent... the future is here and you have a bluray player if you need it. Someone said DVD... maybe, but I think that's over with, and bluray is probably going to happen. For a while anyway.
I just can't pay money for a device so that I can keep paying money to Apple. Put in something extra... DVR or BD.
Apple TV needs one more thing. If it's a DVR, that'd be awesome. A bluray player would be cool too.
I know that sounds backwards since Apple is fighting bluray, but perhaps they market it as an all in one rental device, and people soon realize that they don't need the bluray player at all, no trip to blockbuster, just sit on your ass and rent... the future is here and you have a bluray player if you need it. Someone said DVD... maybe, but I think that's over with, and bluray is probably going to happen. For a while anyway.
I just can't pay money for a device so that I can keep paying money to Apple. Put in something extra... DVR or BD.
Agree. Apple needs to not be too greedy and keep an eye on the long term. iTunes can still rip CDs, and yet Apple is now the largest seller of music. They need to so something to make the AppleTV more attractive to purchase, even if that means a short term reduction of content sales by including DVD, BD, or DVR (in descending order of likelihood). If they keep it such a limited device, it will take longer to get critical mass and give the competition more time to keep up or pull ahead. They need to focus on getting the hardware in living rooms and the rest will follow.
Great quality thoughts here. Not any clear answers of course because there are none.
I think a number of posters here could beat "analysts".
So here's my "Analyst Greg" thoughts.
Apple wants:
Apple wants a single box that allows us to choose what we want to watch, then download over the net to watch that immediately. Absolute choice and good quality. A choice of the big ticket programs, independent productions, your own content, and your friends. It wants to make money on both the content and the hardware.
They don't want to re-purpose the old systems, don't want to stick to what they see as antiquated 'linear' broadcast format or encourage physical media.
(BTW: Although Apple might not agree, I sometimes think Steve has a pet peeve against subscription for TV or Music, eg: paying $100/mth for 300 channels of which you only watch 3.)
The content producers want:
They want to increase returns on advertising, to make money from the same consumer on the same content by having them pay multiple times (from Cinema seats, DVD sales, rentals, PPV, and FTA advertising). They also want to keep their licensees happy (the networks, individual channels, DVD/BD makers etc)
The networks fear Apple taking too much control - the networks are well known brands. Their licensee channels want exclusivity. The DVD/BD makers fear an online future. The result is they want to keep the status quo... and Apple really wants to break the status quo.
The result now:
Unfortunately, it's a stand off. Apple can sell TV shows (which is largely a NEW place the networks can make money) but not rent them (which would earn them far less and transfer revenue from FTA/ads to rental... so no obvious benefit to them). Apple can rent movies in the same window as PPV, which doesn't encroach on the premium movie channels or other money-making windows.
It could do much more if the networks took a leap of faith.
Small proviso: The internet is just catching up to the bandwidth needs
Plausible changes for AppleTV:
*DVR (Free to air)
*DVD
*Bluray
*DVR+Cable Card (or CI satellite card)
*Broader deals with other providers (eg: offer Amazon movies if the movie isn't on AppleTV).
*... and for all the above - centralised media management/storage/hub.
Remember Apple doesn't like physical media or linear TV - as palegolas put it, they're idealistic.
Then there are payment models of advertising, renting, buying, or subscribing which could make a difference.
The future as I see it:
The existing AppleTV could just continue it's slow increase in market share, particularly if other financial models appear. For example, some premium movie networks offer downloads now, so a subscription to "Showtime" or "Encore" may become possible without any change to AppleTV. Apple would need a few big players to get a critical mass - imagine if Discovery put all their content online for a cheap price. Movies, comedy, kids.. I guess Disney is the most plausible candidate.
If Apple got such subscription content, I think that might be enough to really launch the AppleTV.
To the future - I see the next AppleTV in 2 flavors:
1) A beefed up AppleTV much like the existing one. It needs to handle 1080p content from fta (elgato?) recordings, podcasts, and consumer video cameras. A bigger hard disk and upgraded software to handle a "Discovery" online portal etc (if they can negotiate that).
2) ApplePVR - I think Apple will need to offer a "classic TV" device. But they don't like linear TV, so perhaps they will abandon a "TV guide" and provide instead a list of upcoming programs to subscribe to & watch - it doesn't need to say what day or time the shows are on. In addition they can upsell people to iTunes store content, and show free content alongside their rentals.
* And a media server
Apple would MUCH rather offer rental of TV shows etc - but if the TV networks won't play then a PVR is a work around. It also bypasses problems with the Internet backbone being too slow. If the networks work with them, Apple could play nicely and keep the networks' branding, offer an "upgrade for 50c" to watch a show without ads (which gets mostly paid to the local channel), or replace the 8 "generic ads" with 2 "user-targeted ads".
I just don't see support for DVD (history!) or Bluray (not online!). I could be wrong - a "SUPER AppleTV" might even do it all... but they really want to move people to a new "any show, any time, all online" model. A PVR can be made to help people move towards that ideal, where Bluray does not move people towards the model at all. DVD playback could only be a bridge if they allowed us to convert all our old DVDs from physical media onto the media server.
How will apple work with cable / direct tv on demand? That may have the same show free vs pay on itunes?
Cable card v1 is out as it is 1 way and does not work with SDV, PPV, VOD, and some other channels (some systems)
tru2way / OCAP forces apple to have to have to run cable co software on there box. and it may also have to use the build in cable modem for some stuff as well that And the itunes side may have to use the main home network and not work over the cable box only network.
Direct tv is likely out as they going with TIVO and there boxes to day can do some of what ATV can do.
Despite taking the word "computers" out of their name, Apple for the most part still just makes devices that rely on complex computing. Then they simplify and improve the interface and packaging to be extremely portable, contagious, cool, minimal and elegant. That's what they did with their first Macintosh and the iMac renaissance. The iPod similarly relied on the simplification of complex computing, portability, and beauty in an otherwise ugly and clumsy market. The iPhone as a smartphone, again relies on the same factors as the iPod.
In contrast, televisions only require a very basic computing interface; secondly, the current market doesn't suffer from ugly or clumsy brands, but is fully dripping with elegance and coolness. And thirdly, perhaps most importantly, TVs don't rely on portability or ergonomic intimacy as much as laptops, phones or even desktops. People buy a TV, mount it on a console or wall and it pretty much never moves again it's entire life. Not to mention, as society becomes more savvy with mobile devices and computers, TVs are likely to become more expendable to daily life than ever before.
I think Apple appropriately addressed it's potential in the market with their Apple TV device. And improving it to the extent of making it smaller or even more multi-functional would be more in Apple's interest than sticking it in an LG case with an Apple logo.
So the need for complex computing + relevance to daily life + a market hooked on bulkiness and in desperate need of beautiful minimalism + need for mobility = Apple's genius may be better received in the automotive industry?
I think it's a little short-sighted for Piper to make the leap from Apple TV + Apple software prowess = spending millions of dollars and resources to take on such a large and completely superfluous market such as television.
Despite taking the word "computers" out of their name, Apple for the most part still just makes devices that rely on complex computing. Then they simplify and improve the interface and packaging to be extremely portable, contagious, cool, minimal and elegant. That's what they did with their first Macintosh and then the iMac renaissance. The iPod similarly relied on the simplification of complex computing, portability, and beauty in an otherwise ugly and clumsy market. The iPhone, again relies on the same factors as the iPod.
In contrast, televisions only require a very basic computing interface; secondly, the current market doesn't suffer from ugly or clumsy brands, but is fully dripping with elegance and coolness. And thirdly, perhaps most importantly, TVs don't rely on portability or ergonomic intimacy the way laptops, phones or even desktops do. People buy a TV, mount it on a console or wall and it pretty much never moves again it's entire life. Not to mention, as society becomes more savvy with mobile devices and computers, TVs are likely to become more expendable to daily life than ever before.
I think Apple appropriately addressed it's potential in the market with their Apple TV device. And improving it to the extent of making it smaller or even more multi-functional would be more in Apple's interest than sticking it in an LG case with an Apple logo.
So the need for complex computing + relevance to daily life + a market in desperate need for beautiful minimalism + need for mobility = Apple's genius may be better received in the automotive industry?
Thank you Carlos!
For me the dream of Apple make a television and adding AppleTV to it it is just a waste of resources and money at this point in time IMHO.
AppleTV first has to become a major player on their market before Apple contemplates the idea to move into the HDTV display business.
Right now, Apple is having to overcame a major hurdle on the iTunes store. Networks and film studios learning from the music industry are not letting Apple have the tools to take the market like they did with music.
That's why we keep hearing AppleTV is a hobby from Cupertino. Once Apple figure out a way to make AppleTV a successful product like the iPod or iPhone, then we might eventually see them opening a range of products coming out that device, like a TV.
Keep in mind that the HDTV manufactures out there have incredible products with high quality and attractive prices. So really just adding an AppleTV to a display set would make it so much more attractive to the mass market?
I don't think so, first because we know, AppleTV by itself is not a big seller, second having a built-in product like AppleTV that can be obsolete every 2 years on a product that people tend to keep for long time (TVs) makes even less sense. Finally, Apple is aware about the incredible competition and lower profit margin of HDTV set market.
My 2 cents.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ise_ships.html
It seems apple has worked on interface for tv viewing already.
I could see Apple teaming up with AT&T UVerse to make this work. Having wall mounted my tv, I would love to just have an outlet and data connection behind my tv. I don't want any boxes cluttering up my living room. This new idea of all purpose apple tv would accomplish that. But UVerse is the only provider right now (that I know of) that can deliver service without coaxial lines.
I'm OK with having some boxes cluttering up my living room. But what I won't have is one box for cable/satellite, one box for DVD/blu-ray, one box for AppleTV, and possibly yet another box for content that Apple's closed/limited AppleTV can't handle. I also don't want it all in one box (or TV) for the same reason I probably wouldn't ever buy a Time Capsule. One part breaks and your whole system is dead.
TiVo used to partner with other box makers to produce combination TiVo/DVD players. If someone would make one of those, at the right price, with blu-ray, you could replace your cable box and disc player. That would clear room on the shelf for AppleTV. Or if Apple adds blu-ray (or even DVD) to AppleTV, same end result. The point is, something's got to go to make room for something new due to shelf space, number of available inputs, and aesthetics.
How will apple work with cable / direct tv on demand? That may have the same show free vs pay on itunes?
You're right that my reasoning for a PVR doesn't include cable.
For 3 reasons
1) it's difficult for Apple to implement
2) a lot of the major shows are on FTA
3) if they're trying to get people away from the linear TV model, dropping their cable subscription but keeping their FTA offerings (and perhaps spending a bunch of money on iTunes) could be the first step.
Cable card v1 is out as it is 1 way and does not work with SDV, PPV, VOD, and some other channels (some systems)
As above, IF Apple made a cable card PVR, I don't think they'd care if it didn't work with the cable companies pay per view or Video on demand... they want iTunes to be used. The rest is a valid point.
tru2way / OCAP forces apple to have to have to run cable co software on there box. and it may also have to use the build in cable modem for some stuff as well that And the itunes side may have to use the main home network and not work over the cable box only network.
Direct tv is likely out as they going with TIVO and there boxes to day can do some of what ATV can do.
Most of all I'd like to see the AppleTV support 3rd party software (for any apps) - such that an ISP, Cable company, or IPTV company could write player software to their offerings. If it requires cable hardware things get much more complicated as you've noted - standards are changing, satellite is also a big player, and we haven't considered outside the US at all.
The interesting thing...they mention Hulu, Joost, Netflix, and Roku (a set-top box to watch Netflix on your TV instead of your computer), but not a single mention of Apple, iTunes, or AppleTV.
Gene Munster needs to put down the crack pipe.... I'm waiting for iTunes radio and these guys are hung up on DVR and cable boxes... Why would apple allow you to record content for free that they currently sell?
Because some consumers may not purchase their device unless it has DVR capability. Apple is still the major beneficiary if Apple TV content is a mix of free to air and itunes store. I see on-demand and timelapsed content as different but complementary markets.
CNN has a story, "More turning to Web to watch TV, movies". It talks about how more and more people are watching shows online as a way to reduce or eliminate their cable bill.
The interesting thing...they mention Hulu, Joost, Netflix, and Roku (a set-top box to watch Netflix on your TV instead of your computer), but not a single mention of Apple, iTunes, or AppleTV.
IMHO the single biggest improvement that Apple can make to the AppleTV is to open it up so that you can add Hulu, Joost, Netflix and BBC players to it. It already functions as an interface between your computer and TV. The next step is to make it the interface between the net and your TV.