I still think that until very high speed broadband and WiMax have achieved greater acceptance in the US, it's too early to offer an all-in-one Apple HDTV. Also, it doesn't really make sense to equip a TV with computer components that would be so rapidly outdated, unless those components can be swapped out for faster and bigger networking and storage at a later date. And we all know how Apple can be as far as backward compatibility is concerned.
Apple has offered software updates for the iPhone, iPhod Touch, AppleTV and of course Macs that allow older units to not become obsolete quickly.
The 160GB version is ?399, the PS3 is ?373. How is the ATV not overpriced?
As we all know XBox, PS3, and Wii sell at a loss, below manufacturing and distribution costs. They make their money from games and game developers.
ATV makes little to no money from YouTube, Podcasts, TV shows, and Movies. Add-up the hosting, infrastructure, bandwidth, and IT services and you're left with zilch if not -ve.
I think the article clearly demonstrates why Apple should not venture on doing a HDTV.
Seriously there is no reason to ask Apple to put their brand on everything. I would love to see them back focusing on computers hardware and software than start spreading their brand all over the place and losing focus on what is important.
HDTV profit margins are very thin and manufactures are merging, outsourcing and cutting costs to stay afloat. Apple bringing their business to the HDTV market would not change the landscape much. Plus there is amazing technology already out there that brings fantastic picture quality to the current displays.
Apple needs to focus on their own AppleTV hardware first, make the product compelling to the mass market prior to entering the HDTV set segment. Right now AppleTV is even called by Steve Jobs a hobby. Unless they shift their strategy and make a a serious piece of hardware, why bother making a television.
That's the same opinion which said I think Apple is stupid to get in the music player business. Why they shouldn't make a phone etc. This is one train your not going to be able to stop, cause like phones, it's on their product roadmap. They already sell the content, and they want the living room. The Apple TV will be the box, but this will be the high-end option. They'll sell a few million of them in year one, at least. It will be worth it for them, as they'll be a higher profit margin than other guys. As they'll be a bit more pricy. And it will be an priceless brand-boost. Just you try and stop them.
A point that many overlook in retail is that TV's are not a cash cows anymore and deliver incredibly low margins.
You can say EXACTLY the same thing about cell phones prior to Apple's entry into the market. And now, the only reason the iPhone is making money is that it is subsidized via linkage to a service. What if Apple does the same thing with a "networked TV"? The services Apple can provide are becoming quite wide ranging, e.g. "Mobile Me", iTunes, On Demand Rentals, etc.
I don't expect this tomorrow, or anytime soon, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that Apple makes a MUCH stronger move into the digital home at some point in the future.
Just using common sense to why this is not worth the risk at this point in time. Appleinsider offers a very good reason why is not a good idea. Instead you just present wishful thinking to back up your wishes. Bring the facts buddy.
If Apple makes an amazing HDTV that has better picture than Pioneer Kuro and on top of that offer out of this world tech and a comparable price tag, I will gladly sell mine and buy it and congratulate you. But I am not wasting time like you creating a thread every two months to try to make my dreams come true.
Apple interface to correct the hopeless Comcast / DVD / DirecTV / VHS mess that my mom can't figure out: PRICELESS
For every nerd there's a mom who just wants to watch DVDs on an Apple TV that isn't so damn annoying and hard to use as today's setup, which is rapidly approaching helicopter-grade difficulty of operation.
Just using common sense to why this is not worth the risk at this point in time. Appleinsider offers a very good reason why is not a good idea.
Actually I think Dan doesn't offer good reason at all. He compares this Apple Television product to an entry level, cheap, 30" HDTV. Apple will sell on striking hardware, ease-of-use, great "never-seen-before-on-a-TV" software, and seamless integration with the iTunes store, your computer(s), your network and your digital life. Heck, the bloody thing will have just one remote; FINALLY!!
This whole thing would obviously work better if Apple sold it alongside a new TV Show subscription service, but we'll see what happens there. It could even be subsidized if that was the case.
You'll pay more for this, but it will be a lifestyle product, and it would sell well, at a profit. I won't rub it in your face when they release this TV, but like I've been saying for a long time now, it's coming, it's just a question of when.
Apple doesn't compete on price, well not really - Daniel should know better.
My point being, if Blu-Ray is a "niche" at 13% of DVD sales, then downloadable movie sales aren't even on the map. ...
I never said anything about download-able movies, and your original comment that I replied to, was a defence of the sales figures for BluRay. I was pointing out the convoluted logic of your remarks and how they kind of don't make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory Bauer
... And no one was giving away copies of Iron Man on Blu-Ray to fudge the numbers, as you seem to imply.
I implied the possibility of that and reflected on the general inaccuracy of the kinds of numbers you were quoting.
You haven't actually refuted me on that either, you just made another hyperbolic statement about how "no-one" does (or did) that, whereas I at least pointed to historical examples of such practices being rampant. Mine was a speculative remark based on past practice and history, your reply was the rhetorical equivalent of "Oh Yeah?"
It seems at this point that my argument is better supported than yours.
This article is utterly useless, not so much because it contains no factual information, as because the conclusions for the prospects of Apple sucessfully marketing an HDTV with Apple TV built in are based on contrived, nonsensical logic.
The article assumes that the incremental cost of adding Apple TV functionality to an HDTV would be essentially the same as the standalone cost of the Apple TV product. In reality, that incremental cost is likely to be only a fraction of the cost of the standalone product. The article argues that it would make more sense for Apple to partner up with another TV manufacturer to incorporate Apple TV functionality into their TV. Such partnerships might make sense, but even if so, they would not constitute a valid argument against such a TV carring the Apple brand, which would offer several advantages in its own right. The article even argues that it would make more sense to sell the Apple TV as standalone accessories for other brands of TVs. That wouldn't accomplish anything at all, and it doesn't offer any cost savings as compared to Apple TV functionality being incorporated within the TV.
All in all, this article just does not make a whit of sense, and it seems more like something that some naive pundit would write as a contribution to this forum than an article that would be put out by AppleInsider. Virtually none of it is factually correct, and the conjecture is overtly lacking a semblence of logic.
This article is utterly useless, not so much because it contains no factual information, as because the conclusions for the prospects of Apple sucessfully marketing an HDTV with Apple TV built in are based on contrived, nonsensical logic.
The article assumes that the incremental cost of adding Apple TV functionality to an HDTV would be essentially the same as the standalone cost of the Apple TV product. In reality, that incremental cost is likely to be only a fraction of the cost of the standalone product. The article argues that it would make more sense for Apple to partner up with another TV manufacturer to incorporate Apple TV functionality into their TV. Such partnerships might make sense, but even if so, they would not constitute a valid argument against such a TV carring the Apple brand, which would offer several advantages in its own right. The article even argues that it would make more sense to sell the Apple TV as standalone accessories for other brands of TVs. That wouldn't accomplish anything at all, and it doesn't offer any cost savings as compared to Apple TV functionality being incorporated within the TV.
All in all, this article just does not make a whit of sense, and it seems more like something that some naive pundit would write as a contribution to this forum than an article that would be put out by AppleInsider. Virtually none of it is factually correct, and the conjecture is overtly lacking a semblence of logic.
Essentially this is how I felt after I read it to, but never expressed it. Thanks for reading my mind, concisely.
In Europe, the AppleTV is surprisingly expensive. The 40GB version, which better compares to the PS3 costs $229 in the US. Probably because the content sales/rental market is so small compared to the US.
Unlike Sony, who sells the PS3 at a loss to receive large revenues from sales/royalties on high-margin games, Apple is in business to make money.
I hardly call that overpricing...
Why would the 40GB ATV compare to the 80GB PS3?
The consumer does not care it Sony etc is selling the device at a loss, they just see the price, and I can't justify the price (of the 40GB or 160GB) ATV, since my PS3 does the functions of a ATV, plus a hell of a lot more for less money.
Whether the world disagrees with me or not, I have my own opinion.
That's totally fine, but it would be nice if you accept that many folks here have different opinions and views than you, instead you rather just joke about the ones who disagreed with.
As we all know XBox, PS3, and Wii sell at a loss, below manufacturing and distribution costs. They make their money from games and game developers.
ATV makes little to no money from YouTube, Podcasts, TV shows, and Movies. Add-up the hosting, infrastructure, bandwidth, and IT services and you're left with zilch if not -ve.
So what you are saying is, Apple is selling a dead end product, and really should kill it now?
I imagine a day when you can carry around your iPhone as your PC and connect it to anything to get a better view of the screen. Connect it to a docking station with a monitor and a keyboard anywhere in the world and have your full PC at hand - heck, the iPhone already has more power than my PC id 6 or 7 years ago. It'll connect to the internet via AT&T and have all the other full desktop capabilities. I can imagine a world where my iPhone connects to my Apple HDTV wirelessly and I can use it to check and do everything while I watch my favorite TV show using PinP
That's totally fine, but it would be nice if you accept that many folks here have different opinions and views than you, instead you rather just joke about the ones who disagreed with.
I imagine a day when you can carry around your iPhone as your PC and connect it to anything to get a better view of the screen. Connect it to a docking station with a monitor and a keyboard anywhere in the world and have your full PC at hand - heck, the iPhone already has more power than my PC id 6 or 7 years ago. It'll connect to the internet via AT&T and have all the other full desktop capabilities. I can imagine a world where my iPhone connects to my Apple HDTV wirelessly and I can use it to check and do everything while I watch my favorite TV show using PinP
Apple - please lead the way
Sorry, why is the iPhone connecting to the TV did you say?
Comments
32" 720p HDTV + AppleTV + iSight HD + TimeCapsule(500GB)... $999
or
40" 1080p HDTV + AppleTV + iSight HD + TimeCapsule(1TB)... $1499
Apple should use Samsung LCDs and build in a Apple TV with a drive that can also be used for TimeMachine backups.
Put a iSight HD into the screen and allow it to be used for video conferencing.
The AppleTV should also integrate with the iPod Touch and iPhone.
AppleTV should stream whatever is on the screen to an iPod Touch or iPhone within the WiFi area.
Option to have caller ID info and TXT messages appear on the screen.
AppStore for AppleTV...extend the functionality of the AppleTV with additional apps and games.
I still think that until very high speed broadband and WiMax have achieved greater acceptance in the US, it's too early to offer an all-in-one Apple HDTV. Also, it doesn't really make sense to equip a TV with computer components that would be so rapidly outdated, unless those components can be swapped out for faster and bigger networking and storage at a later date. And we all know how Apple can be as far as backward compatibility is concerned.
Apple has offered software updates for the iPhone, iPhod Touch, AppleTV and of course Macs that allow older units to not become obsolete quickly.
The 160GB version is ?399, the PS3 is ?373. How is the ATV not overpriced?
As we all know XBox, PS3, and Wii sell at a loss, below manufacturing and distribution costs. They make their money from games and game developers.
ATV makes little to no money from YouTube, Podcasts, TV shows, and Movies. Add-up the hosting, infrastructure, bandwidth, and IT services and you're left with zilch if not -ve.
I think the article clearly demonstrates why Apple should not venture on doing a HDTV.
Seriously there is no reason to ask Apple to put their brand on everything. I would love to see them back focusing on computers hardware and software than start spreading their brand all over the place and losing focus on what is important.
HDTV profit margins are very thin and manufactures are merging, outsourcing and cutting costs to stay afloat. Apple bringing their business to the HDTV market would not change the landscape much. Plus there is amazing technology already out there that brings fantastic picture quality to the current displays.
Apple needs to focus on their own AppleTV hardware first, make the product compelling to the mass market prior to entering the HDTV set segment. Right now AppleTV is even called by Steve Jobs a hobby. Unless they shift their strategy and make a a serious piece of hardware, why bother making a television.
That's the same opinion which said I think Apple is stupid to get in the music player business. Why they shouldn't make a phone etc. This is one train your not going to be able to stop, cause like phones, it's on their product roadmap. They already sell the content, and they want the living room. The Apple TV will be the box, but this will be the high-end option. They'll sell a few million of them in year one, at least. It will be worth it for them, as they'll be a higher profit margin than other guys. As they'll be a bit more pricy. And it will be an priceless brand-boost. Just you try and stop them.
A point that many overlook in retail is that TV's are not a cash cows anymore and deliver incredibly low margins.
You can say EXACTLY the same thing about cell phones prior to Apple's entry into the market. And now, the only reason the iPhone is making money is that it is subsidized via linkage to a service. What if Apple does the same thing with a "networked TV"? The services Apple can provide are becoming quite wide ranging, e.g. "Mobile Me", iTunes, On Demand Rentals, etc.
I don't expect this tomorrow, or anytime soon, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that Apple makes a MUCH stronger move into the digital home at some point in the future.
Thompson
Not trying to stop any train my friend.
Just using common sense to why this is not worth the risk at this point in time. Appleinsider offers a very good reason why is not a good idea. Instead you just present wishful thinking to back up your wishes. Bring the facts buddy.
If Apple makes an amazing HDTV that has better picture than Pioneer Kuro and on top of that offer out of this world tech and a comparable price tag, I will gladly sell mine and buy it and congratulate you. But I am not wasting time like you creating a thread every two months to try to make my dreams come true.
Apple TV interface and boards
160GB or 320GB drive
Blu-Ray drive
1080p
Apple interface to correct the hopeless Comcast / DVD / DirecTV / VHS mess that my mom can't figure out: PRICELESS
For every nerd there's a mom who just wants to watch DVDs on an Apple TV that isn't so damn annoying and hard to use as today's setup, which is rapidly approaching helicopter-grade difficulty of operation.
Not trying to stop any train my friend.
Just using common sense to why this is not worth the risk at this point in time. Appleinsider offers a very good reason why is not a good idea.
Actually I think Dan doesn't offer good reason at all. He compares this Apple Television product to an entry level, cheap, 30" HDTV. Apple will sell on striking hardware, ease-of-use, great "never-seen-before-on-a-TV" software, and seamless integration with the iTunes store, your computer(s), your network and your digital life. Heck, the bloody thing will have just one remote; FINALLY!!
This whole thing would obviously work better if Apple sold it alongside a new TV Show subscription service, but we'll see what happens there. It could even be subsidized if that was the case.
You'll pay more for this, but it will be a lifestyle product, and it would sell well, at a profit. I won't rub it in your face when they release this TV, but like I've been saying for a long time now, it's coming, it's just a question of when.
Apple doesn't compete on price, well not really - Daniel should know better.
My point being, if Blu-Ray is a "niche" at 13% of DVD sales, then downloadable movie sales aren't even on the map. ...
I never said anything about download-able movies, and your original comment that I replied to, was a defence of the sales figures for BluRay. I was pointing out the convoluted logic of your remarks and how they kind of don't make sense.
... And no one was giving away copies of Iron Man on Blu-Ray to fudge the numbers, as you seem to imply.
I implied the possibility of that and reflected on the general inaccuracy of the kinds of numbers you were quoting.
You haven't actually refuted me on that either, you just made another hyperbolic statement about how "no-one" does (or did) that, whereas I at least pointed to historical examples of such practices being rampant. Mine was a speculative remark based on past practice and history, your reply was the rhetorical equivalent of "Oh Yeah?"
It seems at this point that my argument is better supported than yours.
I won't rub it in your face
.
You can rub it as much as you want. If the product is worth and outstanding, I am going to benefit from it too. So who cares.
Until then you are full of hot air. But you already confirmed that in the past yourself.
Also the folks of Appleinsider bring good reasons and back up my point of view. So, I guess I am in good company.
You can rub it as much as you want. If the product is worth and outstanding, I am going to benefit from it too. So who cares.
Until then you are full of hot air. But you already confirmed that in the past yourself.
Also the folks of Appleinsider bring good reasons and back up my point of view. So, I guess I have good company.
All your smily faces tell me you do. And I don't need backing up. Whether the world disagrees with me or not, I have my own opinion.
The article assumes that the incremental cost of adding Apple TV functionality to an HDTV would be essentially the same as the standalone cost of the Apple TV product. In reality, that incremental cost is likely to be only a fraction of the cost of the standalone product. The article argues that it would make more sense for Apple to partner up with another TV manufacturer to incorporate Apple TV functionality into their TV. Such partnerships might make sense, but even if so, they would not constitute a valid argument against such a TV carring the Apple brand, which would offer several advantages in its own right. The article even argues that it would make more sense to sell the Apple TV as standalone accessories for other brands of TVs. That wouldn't accomplish anything at all, and it doesn't offer any cost savings as compared to Apple TV functionality being incorporated within the TV.
All in all, this article just does not make a whit of sense, and it seems more like something that some naive pundit would write as a contribution to this forum than an article that would be put out by AppleInsider. Virtually none of it is factually correct, and the conjecture is overtly lacking a semblence of logic.
This article is utterly useless, not so much because it contains no factual information, as because the conclusions for the prospects of Apple sucessfully marketing an HDTV with Apple TV built in are based on contrived, nonsensical logic.
The article assumes that the incremental cost of adding Apple TV functionality to an HDTV would be essentially the same as the standalone cost of the Apple TV product. In reality, that incremental cost is likely to be only a fraction of the cost of the standalone product. The article argues that it would make more sense for Apple to partner up with another TV manufacturer to incorporate Apple TV functionality into their TV. Such partnerships might make sense, but even if so, they would not constitute a valid argument against such a TV carring the Apple brand, which would offer several advantages in its own right. The article even argues that it would make more sense to sell the Apple TV as standalone accessories for other brands of TVs. That wouldn't accomplish anything at all, and it doesn't offer any cost savings as compared to Apple TV functionality being incorporated within the TV.
All in all, this article just does not make a whit of sense, and it seems more like something that some naive pundit would write as a contribution to this forum than an article that would be put out by AppleInsider. Virtually none of it is factually correct, and the conjecture is overtly lacking a semblence of logic.
Essentially this is how I felt after I read it to, but never expressed it. Thanks for reading my mind, concisely.
In Europe, the AppleTV is surprisingly expensive. The 40GB version, which better compares to the PS3 costs $229 in the US. Probably because the content sales/rental market is so small compared to the US.
Unlike Sony, who sells the PS3 at a loss to receive large revenues from sales/royalties on high-margin games, Apple is in business to make money.
I hardly call that overpricing...
Why would the 40GB ATV compare to the 80GB PS3?
The consumer does not care it Sony etc is selling the device at a loss, they just see the price, and I can't justify the price (of the 40GB or 160GB) ATV, since my PS3 does the functions of a ATV, plus a hell of a lot more for less money.
Whether the world disagrees with me or not, I have my own opinion.
That's totally fine, but it would be nice if you accept that many folks here have different opinions and views than you, instead you rather just joke about the ones who disagreed with.
Cheers man. Keep the good work.
As we all know XBox, PS3, and Wii sell at a loss, below manufacturing and distribution costs. They make their money from games and game developers.
ATV makes little to no money from YouTube, Podcasts, TV shows, and Movies. Add-up the hosting, infrastructure, bandwidth, and IT services and you're left with zilch if not -ve.
So what you are saying is, Apple is selling a dead end product, and really should kill it now?
Apple - please lead the way
That's totally fine, but it would be nice if you accept that many folks here have different opinions and views than you, instead you rather just joke about the ones who disagreed with.
Cheers man. Keep the good work.
I don't joke, I disagree.
I imagine a day when you can carry around your iPhone as your PC and connect it to anything to get a better view of the screen. Connect it to a docking station with a monitor and a keyboard anywhere in the world and have your full PC at hand - heck, the iPhone already has more power than my PC id 6 or 7 years ago. It'll connect to the internet via AT&T and have all the other full desktop capabilities. I can imagine a world where my iPhone connects to my Apple HDTV wirelessly and I can use it to check and do everything while I watch my favorite TV show using PinP
Apple - please lead the way
Sorry, why is the iPhone connecting to the TV did you say?
I don't joke, I disagree.
yeah, right...