I just can't see it happening - content producers are going to play hard ball and make life as difficult as possible for Apple, which in turn will make Apple look bad as the TV will have very limited content. Secondly, the whole world has just upgraded to flat panel hi def TV's, the price of which are now very low (you can get a very decent samsung tv in the UK for around £400 - £500), most people aren't ready to make that investment again within a year or two - it's the same reason OLED TV remains so expensive (not enough sales to lower the price) and 3D TV doesn't have a chance in hell in the mainstream (no 3D content out there, so why pay 1000s more for the potential?)
The average consumer is being drowned in a barrage of new technology, and most have now bought their family TV which I'd imagine for most families would see them through at least three or four years.
Apple need to focus on a box capable of delivering 1080 hi-def content, with full tvr capabilities and tv tuner, along side all the strengths/functionality of the iOS with app store, games and face time (a return of the external iSight camera to fix on your telly for video chat in the living room). It would also need a Blu-Ray player for most normal consumers to consider the purchase. If they deliver this, then people will be a little more forgiving as more content comes online over time. It would also need blue-tooth support for keyboard and other input device. Wireless, simple streaming of content from computers/laptops/iPads in the household would be an additional killer feature.
A box which offers only limited content from limited content providers will remain a hobby. A single set top box that replaces all others and introduces new functionality would revolutionise the home media set up.
I think that Apple might diverge from the normal iTunes model with this. If they are having trouble negotiating deals, let others do it for them. If they make an AppStore model, they can make a multi-source system for content. You could get your content from netflix, directly from networks, or from a cable provider over TCP/IP connect to your cable box. They will probably continue to offer iTunes shows and videos as an additional option (Kinda like the government health insurance option). If done right, this could both enhance existing cable offerings and add more options to this market.
I just can't see it happening - content producers are going to play hard ball and make life as difficult as possible for Apple, which in turn will make Apple look bad as the TV will have very limited content.
I mostly agree. Apple is going to have to bring ubiquity of content and live sports, news, and special events, or it's just a repackaged version of the content offering they already have for Apple TV.
Quote:
Secondly, the whole world has just upgraded to flat panel hi def TV's, the price of which are now very low (you can get a very decent samsung tv in the UK for around £400 - £500), most people aren't ready to make that investment again within a year or two - it's the same reason OLED TV remains so expensive (not enough sales to lower the price) and 3D TV doesn't have a chance in hell in the mainstream (no 3D content out there, so why pay 1000s more for the potential?)
The average consumer is being drowned in a barrage of new technology, and most have now bought their family TV which I'd imagine for most families would see them through at least three or four years.
I don't think that's very persuasive. The flat panel market is still growing, and innovation always drives replacement sales. Apple doesn't compete in commodotized markets; if they can't offer something that innovates, they won't get into that market.
Quote:
Apple need to focus on a box capable of delivering 1080 hi-def content, with full tvr capabilities and tv tuner, along side all the strengths/functionality of the iOS with app store, games and face time (a return of the external iSight camera to fix on your telly for video chat in the living room). It would also need a Blu-Ray player for most normal consumers to consider the purchase. If they deliver this, then people will be a little more forgiving as more content comes online over time. It would also need blue-tooth support for keyboard and other input device. Wireless, simple streaming of content from computers/laptops/iPads in the household would be an additional killer feature.
A box which offers only limited content from limited content providers will remain a hobby. A single set top box that replaces all others and introduces new functionality would revolutionise the home media set up.
1080p: Netflix Watch Instantly isn't 1080p, and most of the content looks as good as the Comcast HD channels that I get. I'm not sure that's a huge priority.
DVR/TV tuner: Maybe. I think Apple would market an iTV as a cable killer, so it's hard to say if they would include cable/satellite capability or market the product as a hard break from that payment model.
Blu-ray: Same. I could see Apple moving past Blu-ray as a relic of days when you needed a physical disc to watch a movie. Skipping Blu-ray would also help with the price point.
In that price comparison, the apple HDTV comes out looking terrible. Not to mention that many people are still going to want to watch optical disks, and unless they are somehow streamed from iTunes, people will want cable for sporting events and other real time shows (not to mention just watching TV when it's actually on - releasing shows immediately after air if not during would be a huge improvement over next day).
Netflix, hulu, and other third party streaming offerings would be a huge upgrade to aTV, I'd even consider one at that point, but I'm skeptical apple will allow things other than iTunes.
I think apple could be huge in the tv/set top box business but I see them shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing things other than iTunes.
do you find their Mac offerings to be lacking nowadays? What effect has iPhones/iPads/etc had on their Mac products?
Mention iMac or Snow Leopard or Apple TV to the average Joe and they have no idea what you mean. Like it our not, outside of the Apple community, most people know of Apple as "that company that makes iPods and iPhones." This is true in America and especially other countries.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name. If anyone was thinking of delving deeper into the Apple ecosystem, they would think twice after dropping calls all over the place.
For this reason, I too mourn the loss of the former Apple Computer company. They have morphed in to a company that cares about consumer devices for idiot teenagers who have nothing to do all day but walking across the street texting while B Bopping to the latest Lady Gaga symphony.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name.
Just like the sticking gas pedal and Toyota? Doing business in the US is apparently a high-risk operation as you can get hit by a shitstorm at any moment.
...I think apple could be huge in the tv/set top box business but I see them shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing things other than iTunes.
Well then what would you need iTunes for if your future AppleTV or iTV or whatever were as open and as compatible as a WDTV Live or similar? Apple's model relies on the sale or rental of content and an open AppleTV device would definitely hurt that revenue stream.
I have a solution for this already... I am getting the new MacMini hooked up to my 55" Samsung and a PS3 for Blu-Ray. The internet comes via a DSL, but I am about to switch to fiberoptic that offers 10, 30, 50 MB plans and symmetrical. Once I got that, I can even ditch the cable rip-off plan after I connect a digital antenna in the attic for local broadcast channels.
This way, I can watch 1080P BluRay movies, and some HD streamed content from Netflix, Hulu, You Tube, and over the air HDTV. The cable channels are just too full of garbage and makes no sense to have them. Even financial news can be seen via Bloomberg TV. Got to spend some $moolah and this is not for everybody. I can save $100+/mo in cable subscription per month so the MacMini has quick pay-off, plus I can surf the internet.
I hope Apple does well with iTV, but I do not see where they will fit in the market place. Content is the key and so far they have a hard time getting content. Plus makes no sense cutting the capability and go with 720P. So far it sounds like a MacMini Lite... kind like the PC Jr with the chicklet keyboard, if anybody is old enough to remember that fiasco.
If Apple ever did make a TV set, it would cost twice as much as anyone else's, have a mirror like glossy screen to better see yourself, and would only work on Apple's electricity.
Steve O pretty much dismissed the future of the Apple TV on that D? interview so why are we to believe there is one forthcoming? He said the business model had no where to go as quoted in the article. Besides, you all hate Pied Piper and his predictions.
Forget the stupid TV Apple and fix the stuff you already have out. Apple has serious problems executing lately and if I were Steve Mobs I would pay attention to that. The company has a huge black eye over the iPhone 4 and their brand name is in jeopardy.
Straighten up and stop making stupid decisions.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
I hate this HDTV rumour with a passion. We're talking about a company that goes out of its way to have a limited number of devices. You simply can't do that with the TV market as there are way to many reasons. Then there is the lack of profits from these low PPI monitors. Since none of the rumours specify panel type, size, etc. I have to think it's just a poorly thought out wish.
What I can see are possible AppleTV types: 1) One built into the new Mac Mini case with a HDD for local storage designed for your main big screen TV. 2) A cheap, simple device for streaming that one could feasibly put on all the other TVs in the house. 3) A device that "connects" to the back of any and all TVs that wish to participate by way of a universal plug and clamps.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
The truth is the truth. What difference does it make how I convey it? I've made no secret of the fact that this forum frustrates me in it's inability to criticize Apple. There is a difference between liking their products and worshipping at the alter of Jobs. If everyone else would keep it in perspective, I wouldn't get my iP4 antenna in such a knot.
I will take your post as a personal victory for the logical point of view.
I think going with a physical TV makes very little sense to Apple - the actual value they can add to the TV outside of the AppleTV functionality itself, is very minimal. All the functionality mentioned in this article is already possible with a reinvented Apple TV.
I think the way Apple will go ahead will be the following:
- Move Apple TV to iOS, opening up AppStore.
- Cloud based DVR with limited local DVR.
- Built in Video tuner capability to hook up other devices
- Sell cheap iPod Touch as a iControl remote control unit, including IR Transceiver, WiFi, etc.
- Sell motorized iSight camera to be mounted on top of TV - with pan, zoom functions. These functions should be controllable from iControl as well.
- Integrate DVR functionality with MobileMe - so that we can enable and change recordings from anywhere in the planet.
- Integrated SlingBox functionality for place shifting - using Mobile Me - any content available from Cloud will be streamed from Cloud
For me and I'm sure a whole lot of other people, $90/month is way too expensive. I ditched my cable for a broadcast antenna, and that's my TV. I can watch some stuff online, also. I also think that having to pay cable Internet at $60 and an additional $30/month smartphone data plan is too much. Right now, Google TV looks more attractive than iTV.
As Jobs stated before, the real barrier facing Apple are the telco/cable monopolies that control the pipes that feed the content from the producers... Very few of us don't rely on the same company providing both our internet connection and our television content. No Apple-branded, Google-branded, or Microsoft-branded solution will topple that. Sure there will a limited number of partnerships formed, but in general the monopolies are real smart ensuring they stay a monopoly.
What I find interesting, is that Apple/Google/Microsoft had a chance a couple of years ago to buy some pipes when the FCC was auctioning off that wireless spectrum that could be used to build for a nation-wide wireless broadband infrastructure. It seemed like that sprectrum could be used to unseat the telcos (or at least provide some much needed competition). None of the three seem to make a serious bid for it. If Jobs and company had a chance to own some pipes but chose not, its logical to think that the ROI just isn't there in trying to unseat the telcos.
The AppleTV or iTV should be a simple way to stream your content residing on your home computer to your televison... It should be cheap and just work. Not sure what an app store would provide? High quality apps (i.e., games) would need good hardware and turn the iTV into a gaming console, which in turn affects the price... The idea of a Netflix streaming app residing on my iTV doesn't sound like the direction Apple will take.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
I wholeheartedly disagree with his conclusion that Jobs dismissed media extender appliances at All Things D. I say he confirmed a new one was coming.
Apple launches the device into the media extenders market before it was mature or focused. This has worked for out great for the iPad but we've seen stand alone media extenders evolve to best Apple in many ways and PVRs and game consols add features that mimic what Apple had done a couple years earlier. Two mistakes they made were setting it up against the original iPhone and depending on contracts from content owners to help sell the device before they inked the deals. I'm sure that mini-demo back in 2006 was to help push the content owners into seeing a secure connected option for their content, not for us. The demo for us came months later at MWSF 2007.
I think going with a physical TV makes very little sense to Apple - the actual value they can add to the TV outside of the AppleTV functionality itself, is very minimal. All the functionality mentioned in this article is already possible with a reinvented Apple TV.
I think the way Apple will go ahead will be the following:
- Move Apple TV to iOS, opening up AppStore.
Explain please why anyone would want iOS to escape from the iPhone or iPod or iPad? It's a watered down crippled version of OSX. And it's a walled garden, why in the world would we want another device to have it?
I am waiting to pull the lever on a new Apple TV but if they flipped to iOS, I would try to grab an older one from Amazon. I want flash videos, I want free HULU, I want the full YouTube that lets me watch classic TV shows. I want the real internet, with a firefox option because Safari doesn't work with every website.
Besides, no one has said if the new version would allow you to stream content from your real Mac to your TV. I like that feature for looking at Photos on the TV set.
Too bad a FIOS DVR only lets you do that with a PC.
I just sold my 3 year old AppleTV for $100 yesterday (which I loved!) I cancelled my cable ($60/mo is too much) and am thinking about selling my 46" HDTV, DVD player and my 20" intel iMac and replacing both with a 27" iMac...put it in my living room the odd time I want watch a red box DVD...connect my eyeTV and record a local channel the odd time I want to watch a local channel and skip the commercials.
And just have my silver Apple remote instead of the craptastic remotes from the TV/DVD/Cable companies!
Instead of watching TV...I've decided to start training for a Triathlon!
The truth is the truth. What difference does it make how I convey it? I've made no secret of the fact that this forum frustrates me in it's inability to criticize Apple. There is a difference between liking their products and worshipping at the alter of Jobs. If everyone else would keep it in perspective, I wouldn't get my iP4 antenna in such a knot.
I will take your post as a personal victory for the logical point of view.
Perhaps you need to read more carefully. Most people hear have positive AND negative things to say about Apple and Jobs. Your rhetoric doesn't change that, but it does weaken any point you may have.
If you want to talk about reading into things to see only worship note that you made a comment that infers that because Steve said so it must be true. Sounds to me like you think his word is canon.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name. If anyone was thinking of delving deeper into the Apple ecosystem, they would think twice after dropping calls all over the place.
NO, it hasn't. Apple dealt with it very well, by keeping quiet, then making a one off statement - "it's BS, now shut up about it". That was enough for Jo Ordinary, that plus that fact that only a very small percentage of people exhibit the antenna or proximity sensor issue. The devices are still sold out, Apple share price is fine and it's still a must have item. Apple couldn't sell any more than they are doing and production barely seems to be keeping up.
You see your friend has an iPhone - how is it? Amazing? Any Problems? No.
That undoes all of the unfounded media hysteria. People are over this now. It's why the new android phone with similar issue won't be a big story.
Comments
I just can't see it happening - content producers are going to play hard ball and make life as difficult as possible for Apple, which in turn will make Apple look bad as the TV will have very limited content. Secondly, the whole world has just upgraded to flat panel hi def TV's, the price of which are now very low (you can get a very decent samsung tv in the UK for around £400 - £500), most people aren't ready to make that investment again within a year or two - it's the same reason OLED TV remains so expensive (not enough sales to lower the price) and 3D TV doesn't have a chance in hell in the mainstream (no 3D content out there, so why pay 1000s more for the potential?)
The average consumer is being drowned in a barrage of new technology, and most have now bought their family TV which I'd imagine for most families would see them through at least three or four years.
Apple need to focus on a box capable of delivering 1080 hi-def content, with full tvr capabilities and tv tuner, along side all the strengths/functionality of the iOS with app store, games and face time (a return of the external iSight camera to fix on your telly for video chat in the living room). It would also need a Blu-Ray player for most normal consumers to consider the purchase. If they deliver this, then people will be a little more forgiving as more content comes online over time. It would also need blue-tooth support for keyboard and other input device. Wireless, simple streaming of content from computers/laptops/iPads in the household would be an additional killer feature.
A box which offers only limited content from limited content providers will remain a hobby. A single set top box that replaces all others and introduces new functionality would revolutionise the home media set up.
I think that Apple might diverge from the normal iTunes model with this. If they are having trouble negotiating deals, let others do it for them. If they make an AppStore model, they can make a multi-source system for content. You could get your content from netflix, directly from networks, or from a cable provider over TCP/IP connect to your cable box. They will probably continue to offer iTunes shows and videos as an additional option (Kinda like the government health insurance option). If done right, this could both enhance existing cable offerings and add more options to this market.
I just can't see it happening - content producers are going to play hard ball and make life as difficult as possible for Apple, which in turn will make Apple look bad as the TV will have very limited content.
I mostly agree. Apple is going to have to bring ubiquity of content and live sports, news, and special events, or it's just a repackaged version of the content offering they already have for Apple TV.
Secondly, the whole world has just upgraded to flat panel hi def TV's, the price of which are now very low (you can get a very decent samsung tv in the UK for around £400 - £500), most people aren't ready to make that investment again within a year or two - it's the same reason OLED TV remains so expensive (not enough sales to lower the price) and 3D TV doesn't have a chance in hell in the mainstream (no 3D content out there, so why pay 1000s more for the potential?)
The average consumer is being drowned in a barrage of new technology, and most have now bought their family TV which I'd imagine for most families would see them through at least three or four years.
I don't think that's very persuasive. The flat panel market is still growing, and innovation always drives replacement sales. Apple doesn't compete in commodotized markets; if they can't offer something that innovates, they won't get into that market.
Apple need to focus on a box capable of delivering 1080 hi-def content, with full tvr capabilities and tv tuner, along side all the strengths/functionality of the iOS with app store, games and face time (a return of the external iSight camera to fix on your telly for video chat in the living room). It would also need a Blu-Ray player for most normal consumers to consider the purchase. If they deliver this, then people will be a little more forgiving as more content comes online over time. It would also need blue-tooth support for keyboard and other input device. Wireless, simple streaming of content from computers/laptops/iPads in the household would be an additional killer feature.
A box which offers only limited content from limited content providers will remain a hobby. A single set top box that replaces all others and introduces new functionality would revolutionise the home media set up.
1080p: Netflix Watch Instantly isn't 1080p, and most of the content looks as good as the Comcast HD channels that I get. I'm not sure that's a huge priority.
FaceTime: Definitely. Apps: Definitely. Games: Definitely.
DVR/TV tuner: Maybe. I think Apple would market an iTV as a cable killer, so it's hard to say if they would include cable/satellite capability or market the product as a hard break from that payment model.
Blu-ray: Same. I could see Apple moving past Blu-ray as a relic of days when you needed a physical disc to watch a movie. Skipping Blu-ray would also help with the price point.
Netflix, hulu, and other third party streaming offerings would be a huge upgrade to aTV, I'd even consider one at that point, but I'm skeptical apple will allow things other than iTunes.
I think apple could be huge in the tv/set top box business but I see them shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing things other than iTunes.
do you find their Mac offerings to be lacking nowadays? What effect has iPhones/iPads/etc had on their Mac products?
Mention iMac or Snow Leopard or Apple TV to the average Joe and they have no idea what you mean. Like it our not, outside of the Apple community, most people know of Apple as "that company that makes iPods and iPhones." This is true in America and especially other countries.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name. If anyone was thinking of delving deeper into the Apple ecosystem, they would think twice after dropping calls all over the place.
For this reason, I too mourn the loss of the former Apple Computer company. They have morphed in to a company that cares about consumer devices for idiot teenagers who have nothing to do all day but walking across the street texting while B Bopping to the latest Lady Gaga symphony.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name.
Just like the sticking gas pedal and Toyota? Doing business in the US is apparently a high-risk operation as you can get hit by a shitstorm at any moment.
...I think apple could be huge in the tv/set top box business but I see them shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing things other than iTunes.
Well then what would you need iTunes for if your future AppleTV or iTV or whatever were as open and as compatible as a WDTV Live or similar? Apple's model relies on the sale or rental of content and an open AppleTV device would definitely hurt that revenue stream.
This way, I can watch 1080P BluRay movies, and some HD streamed content from Netflix, Hulu, You Tube, and over the air HDTV. The cable channels are just too full of garbage and makes no sense to have them. Even financial news can be seen via Bloomberg TV. Got to spend some $moolah and this is not for everybody. I can save $100+/mo in cable subscription per month so the MacMini has quick pay-off, plus I can surf the internet.
I hope Apple does well with iTV, but I do not see where they will fit in the market place. Content is the key and so far they have a hard time getting content. Plus makes no sense cutting the capability and go with 720P. So far it sounds like a MacMini Lite... kind like the PC Jr with the chicklet keyboard, if anybody is old enough to remember that fiasco.
If Apple ever did make a TV set, it would cost twice as much as anyone else's, have a mirror like glossy screen to better see yourself, and would only work on Apple's electricity.
Steve O pretty much dismissed the future of the Apple TV on that D? interview so why are we to believe there is one forthcoming? He said the business model had no where to go as quoted in the article. Besides, you all hate Pied Piper and his predictions.
Forget the stupid TV Apple and fix the stuff you already have out. Apple has serious problems executing lately and if I were Steve Mobs I would pay attention to that. The company has a huge black eye over the iPhone 4 and their brand name is in jeopardy.
Straighten up and stop making stupid decisions.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
What I can see are possible AppleTV types: 1) One built into the new Mac Mini case with a HDD for local storage designed for your main big screen TV. 2) A cheap, simple device for streaming that one could feasibly put on all the other TVs in the house. 3) A device that "connects" to the back of any and all TVs that wish to participate by way of a universal plug and clamps.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
The truth is the truth. What difference does it make how I convey it? I've made no secret of the fact that this forum frustrates me in it's inability to criticize Apple. There is a difference between liking their products and worshipping at the alter of Jobs. If everyone else would keep it in perspective, I wouldn't get my iP4 antenna in such a knot.
I will take your post as a personal victory for the logical point of view.
I think the way Apple will go ahead will be the following:
- Move Apple TV to iOS, opening up AppStore.
- Cloud based DVR with limited local DVR.
- Built in Video tuner capability to hook up other devices
- Sell cheap iPod Touch as a iControl remote control unit, including IR Transceiver, WiFi, etc.
- Sell motorized iSight camera to be mounted on top of TV - with pan, zoom functions. These functions should be controllable from iControl as well.
- Integrate DVR functionality with MobileMe - so that we can enable and change recordings from anywhere in the planet.
- Integrated SlingBox functionality for place shifting - using Mobile Me - any content available from Cloud will be streamed from Cloud
Have blogged in great detail about this at:
http://prastalk.blogspot.com/2010/05...einvented.html
What I find interesting, is that Apple/Google/Microsoft had a chance a couple of years ago to buy some pipes when the FCC was auctioning off that wireless spectrum that could be used to build for a nation-wide wireless broadband infrastructure. It seemed like that sprectrum could be used to unseat the telcos (or at least provide some much needed competition). None of the three seem to make a serious bid for it. If Jobs and company had a chance to own some pipes but chose not, its logical to think that the ROI just isn't there in trying to unseat the telcos.
The AppleTV or iTV should be a simple way to stream your content residing on your home computer to your televison... It should be cheap and just work. Not sure what an app store would provide? High quality apps (i.e., games) would need good hardware and turn the iTV into a gaming console, which in turn affects the price... The idea of a Netflix streaming app residing on my iTV doesn't sound like the direction Apple will take.
If you weren't being such a jerk in just about every post of yours, I'd actually agree with you.
I wholeheartedly disagree with his conclusion that Jobs dismissed media extender appliances at All Things D. I say he confirmed a new one was coming.
Apple launches the device into the media extenders market before it was mature or focused. This has worked for out great for the iPad but we've seen stand alone media extenders evolve to best Apple in many ways and PVRs and game consols add features that mimic what Apple had done a couple years earlier. Two mistakes they made were setting it up against the original iPhone and depending on contracts from content owners to help sell the device before they inked the deals. I'm sure that mini-demo back in 2006 was to help push the content owners into seeing a secure connected option for their content, not for us. The demo for us came months later at MWSF 2007.
I think going with a physical TV makes very little sense to Apple - the actual value they can add to the TV outside of the AppleTV functionality itself, is very minimal. All the functionality mentioned in this article is already possible with a reinvented Apple TV.
I think the way Apple will go ahead will be the following:
- Move Apple TV to iOS, opening up AppStore.
Explain please why anyone would want iOS to escape from the iPhone or iPod or iPad? It's a watered down crippled version of OSX. And it's a walled garden, why in the world would we want another device to have it?
I am waiting to pull the lever on a new Apple TV but if they flipped to iOS, I would try to grab an older one from Amazon. I want flash videos, I want free HULU, I want the full YouTube that lets me watch classic TV shows. I want the real internet, with a firefox option because Safari doesn't work with every website.
Besides, no one has said if the new version would allow you to stream content from your real Mac to your TV. I like that feature for looking at Photos on the TV set.
Too bad a FIOS DVR only lets you do that with a PC.
I wholeheartedly disagree with his conclusion that Jobs dismissed media extender appliances at All Things D. I say he confirmed a new one was coming.
Amazing how two people can listen to the same words and reach such different conclusions. I guess this is how Barrack got elected.
And just have my silver Apple remote instead of the craptastic remotes from the TV/DVD/Cable companies!
Instead of watching TV...I've decided to start training for a Triathlon!
Best!
The truth is the truth. What difference does it make how I convey it? I've made no secret of the fact that this forum frustrates me in it's inability to criticize Apple. There is a difference between liking their products and worshipping at the alter of Jobs. If everyone else would keep it in perspective, I wouldn't get my iP4 antenna in such a knot.
I will take your post as a personal victory for the logical point of view.
Perhaps you need to read more carefully. Most people hear have positive AND negative things to say about Apple and Jobs. Your rhetoric doesn't change that, but it does weaken any point you may have.
If you want to talk about reading into things to see only worship note that you made a comment that infers that because Steve said so it must be true. Sounds to me like you think his word is canon.
Whether they deserve it or not, the iPhone 4 has given Apple a black eye and it has hurt their brand name. If anyone was thinking of delving deeper into the Apple ecosystem, they would think twice after dropping calls all over the place.
NO, it hasn't. Apple dealt with it very well, by keeping quiet, then making a one off statement - "it's BS, now shut up about it". That was enough for Jo Ordinary, that plus that fact that only a very small percentage of people exhibit the antenna or proximity sensor issue. The devices are still sold out, Apple share price is fine and it's still a must have item. Apple couldn't sell any more than they are doing and production barely seems to be keeping up.
You see your friend has an iPhone - how is it? Amazing? Any Problems? No.
That undoes all of the unfounded media hysteria. People are over this now. It's why the new android phone with similar issue won't be a big story.