Apple could differentiate themselves in the TV market by making the TV the actual digital hub for the home. They could include some iOS based home server as well as the AirPort Extreme and Apple TV into the set. I do agree that redesigning the remote is the key to making it work, however, I still don't see how they are going to integrate with the cable box.
Please, some one answer me what an Apple-branded TV would do which my current HDTV and AppleTV couldn't do?
Honestly, I buy a TV for it's picture quality and nothing else. If I want to play games or watch TV, I'll use a dedicated device!
I'll start by saying, I don't think Apple will make an HDTV. I know they could make a great product, but it would likely be too expensive for me, and even if it was not, I can't justify a new HDTV set when mine is only a couple of years old.
With that said, if Apple were to do this, the benefit to users would be that it has the potential to have the iOS interface in the first layer, so that when the TV is on, this is how you interact with the TV to give commands and access features. Currently the ATV is on a different input, so you have to switch over. It's not extremely difficult of course, but it is not nearly as seamless as it could be. Also, an all-in-one solution (a la giant iMac) with a built in iSight cam for FaceTime on the bigscreen would be a huge seller for families everywhere.
I wouldn't be opposed to something along the lines of "Made for iCloud" whereby internet TV manufacturers can be licensed to stream our digital library without the need for another top box.
But I've no idea if this is even feasible or if people want it!
I wouldn't be opposed to something along the lines of "Made for iCloud" whereby internet TV manufacturers can be licensed to stream our digital library without the need for another top box.
But I've no idea if this is even feasible or if people want it!
Looking at the care Apple has given this particular logo (read: golden ratio) and what I believe Apple wants the iCloud to be I think that makes a lot of sense.
I can see this in the corner of a TV's frame at big box stores.
Apple's newly unveiled iCloud service, ..... is seen by one prominent analyst as even more evidence that the company is planning to release a high-definition television set as soon as late 2012.
Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray on Thursday reiterated his long-held stance that Apple is working on its own full-fledged television set, rather than just a set-top box like the current Apple TV. He said the forthcoming iCloud service would make an Apple-branded television even more plausible ......
MUNSTERVISION:
The dreaded "Wall Street Analysts" strike again!!!!
Nice work if you can get it: a "Wall Street Analyst" is someone who gets paid BIG BUCKS to churn out bullshit tales by punters stupid enough to believe them.
Among them, Gene Munster's USP is the "Apple TV". NOT the "Apple TV" that Apple sells, and which since the price was dropped to 99 smackers is selling in huge numbers. NO, the Munster believes that Apple will start selling real TV's. In fact, he has been predicting this since 2008, and even though none of these predictions ever come true, people still keep paying him to predict the Apple TV "really soon".
These hucksters work like most, relying on the fact that most people don't remember what they heard before and don't bother checking facts when someone tells them what they want to hear. They also reinforce each other. So, with no real evidence at all, Gene Munster will say "Apple is expected to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then someone like Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty chimes in with a report that "analysts are reporting that Apple is expected to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then an unknown blogger desperate for hit counts puts the two together with a blog that says "analysts are expecting Apple to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then Gene issues another prediction, quoting Katy and desperate blogger .............
So then Macworld 2011 comes around, and guess what, no Apple TV. Well, of course there is the $99 one that Apple sells in huge numbers, just not the one that needs to walk out of an Apple Store on the back of a large truck. Everyone forgets that Gene Munster said the same thing in 2008 and it wasn't true, Gene Munster said the same thing in 2009 and it wasn't true, Gene Munster said the same thing in 2010 and it wasn't true and now Gene Munster said the same thing in 2011 and it wasn't true, allowing the same Gene Munster to say the same thing in 2012 and tech journos and bloggers will still expect it to be true,
...
Anyone who has bought a wide-arse TV recently knows the following:
- they come in different sizes. Even if you discount below 1080p, there are 32, 40, 46 and 55 - inchers at affordable prices
- they come in different models. Even though the differences may be marginal, there is always a "Good, Better, Best" range of options. For each size, Best is often twice the price of Good
- they come come out with different features at least every year. However, no-one buys a new tellie every year. Unlike PC's, people don't even buy a new tellie every three years, it's more like 5 to 10
- the price changes. After a few months, you can buy the same model for two thirds of list price. A year later they are half price
- they come with different technical specs for different parts of the world
...
So, even if Apple was prepared to develop dozens of new models every year, and face cut-throat competition from other TV makers, this scenario ignores the most obvious thing that Apple could do to sell EVEN MORE $99 Apple TV modules:
Oh wait, the Munstervision also ignores the fact that in between Munster starting on his quest, when the Apple TV was a big expensive HDTV add-on, and now, Steve Jobs was seen discussing the difficulties for Apple of getting involved in the TV business. People not willing to pay a little bit more for a higher quality product was one factor mentioned. Then after that the new Apple TV became a compact, inexpensive HDTV add-on ...........
Somehow, I think that when Apple introduced the compact, inexpensive Apple TV, Jobs may have been *just hoping* it would solve some of the difficulties he had been talking about ...........
....
So, where was I? Oh yes, the most obvious thing that Apple could do to sell EVEN MORE $99 Apple TV modules:
at heart, the Apple TV is a tiny computer running the same Unix-based OS as the iPhone or the iPad. It does not have any storage beyond a small flash chip, cannot make phone calls and it's not mobile, but it has two VERY BIG advantages: 1. it is connected to the internet and 2. it is connected to a big-arse TV. We know that Apple has been having LULZ with connections between the iPhone, the iPad and your big-arse TV via the AppleTV, but so far the AppleTV has been just a dumb junction box ..........
however, the Apple TV is still a computer running the same OS as the iPhone or the iPad. It could also run the same Apps, if Apple let it. How so, with no storage?
Well, perhaps it could make use of a thing called iCloud .........
...
Now if Gene Munster somehow had a clue, then what Apple has been building over the past few years in North Carolina would have been a television factory. Even Gene should now be aware that it's not a television factory, it's a data centre. A BIG ONE. Gene may also have heard that Apple has been investing in big buildings in Japan. Television factories? well, maybe, but we already have television factories here and in Korea ...........
Now I am not an overpaid "Wall Street Analyst" like Gene, nor the genius and/or evil mastermind behind Apple like Steve Jobs, but I would hazard a guess that if the AppleTV could be coaxed into running iPhone Apps on your TV, while allowing your iPhone or iPad to get involved in the action, many more people would see the value in buying a $99 Apple TV module (while you're spending a grand or so buying the TV) and then buying $1 - $10 games rather than, say a $300 games console and $10 - $20 games. I would also guess that if this becomes possible, the iCloud may be there to make up for the lack of storage on the AppleTV ............
Of course, I could be entirely wrong about this. Rather than the AppleTV allowing Apple to enter and dominate computer gaming, it could be that Apple's plans are for the AppleTV allowing Apple to enter and dominate the online video and TV download and rental market .....................
Looking at the care Apple has given this particular logo (read: golden ratio) and what I believe Apple wants the iCloud to be I think that makes a lot of sense.
I can see this in the corner of a TV's frame at big box stores.
For those that don't really understand the golden ratio,
Why not just an aTV with HDMI inputs? Most newer equipment can be controlled through the HDMI cable, thus allowing your iphone/ipod/ipad to become your one and only remote.
A large Apple TV with logo is a great way for Apple to make their presence in the living room known. If they go in with a big push a TV is the way to show it off.
Perfect iCloud / iPad or iPhone / iTunes integration
Great user interface
But - no mater how clever the hardware, content is King and Apple needs to find a way to work with the content providers. If Apple could find a way for cable co's to be comfortably presented through the Apple gui / epg without loosing face or without feeling threatened (like Netflix on ATV) then this could be HUGE.
An Apple TV will not be about the hardware on its own, it will be about the Apple eco-system and about controlling the living room.
1) work with the TV manufacturers to include AirPlay support in their TVs
2) Create an "Apple TV" app for the iPhone/iPad, or make sure that all of the equivalent functionality of the Apple TV is available within the existing apps - along with AirPlay support. For example they might add the ability to "rent" a movie from the iTunes app and push it to an AirPlay device.
And if you have a TV without AirPlay support, you buy the $99 Apple TV and you're set.
Why not just an aTV with HDMI inputs? Most newer equipment can be controlled through the HDMI cable, thus allowing your iphone/ipod/ipad to become your one and only remote.
I want real buttons. I don't think having to look at your remote and hold it with one hand while swiping with the other is as convenient as a tactile interface.
Comments
how do you know he's american?
Do they sell Lazy-boy and Cheetos anywhere else?
Do they sell Lazy-boy and Cheetos anywhere else?
Well, Canada, for one.
Well, Canada, for one.
I'm sorry to hear that. What are you going to tell me next..that you have graffiti and thugs with their pants half way down their asses too?
Please, some one answer me what an Apple-branded TV would do which my current HDTV and AppleTV couldn't do?
Honestly, I buy a TV for it's picture quality and nothing else. If I want to play games or watch TV, I'll use a dedicated device!
I'll start by saying, I don't think Apple will make an HDTV. I know they could make a great product, but it would likely be too expensive for me, and even if it was not, I can't justify a new HDTV set when mine is only a couple of years old.
With that said, if Apple were to do this, the benefit to users would be that it has the potential to have the iOS interface in the first layer, so that when the TV is on, this is how you interact with the TV to give commands and access features. Currently the ATV is on a different input, so you have to switch over. It's not extremely difficult of course, but it is not nearly as seamless as it could be. Also, an all-in-one solution (a la giant iMac) with a built in iSight cam for FaceTime on the bigscreen would be a huge seller for families everywhere.
But I've no idea if this is even feasible or if people want it!
It's just going to be a giant iPad or an enormous iPhone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct1_r_61sk8
Holding it up to take pictures with the rear facing camera will be tough
I wouldn't be opposed to something along the lines of "Made for iCloud" whereby internet TV manufacturers can be licensed to stream our digital library without the need for another top box.
But I've no idea if this is even feasible or if people want it!
Looking at the care Apple has given this particular logo (read: golden ratio) and what I believe Apple wants the iCloud to be I think that makes a lot of sense. I can see this in the corner of a TV's frame at big box stores.
how do you know he's american?
Maybe because he said 'Cheetos' and not 'crisps'?????
Munster is right on this one. It could even -- depending on Jobs's health -- be later this year.
And, it'll be great to come back to threads like this in 2014!
Yes, it will. However, we won't bother, there'll be new debates, new arguments and new trolls to slay (with kindness).
I'm sorry to hear that. What are you going to tell me next..that you have graffiti and thugs with their pants half way down their asses too?
Apple's newly unveiled iCloud service, ..... is seen by one prominent analyst as even more evidence that the company is planning to release a high-definition television set as soon as late 2012.
Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray on Thursday reiterated his long-held stance that Apple is working on its own full-fledged television set, rather than just a set-top box like the current Apple TV. He said the forthcoming iCloud service would make an Apple-branded television even more plausible ......
MUNSTERVISION:
The dreaded "Wall Street Analysts" strike again!!!!
Nice work if you can get it: a "Wall Street Analyst" is someone who gets paid BIG BUCKS to churn out bullshit tales by punters stupid enough to believe them.
Among them, Gene Munster's USP is the "Apple TV". NOT the "Apple TV" that Apple sells, and which since the price was dropped to 99 smackers is selling in huge numbers. NO, the Munster believes that Apple will start selling real TV's. In fact, he has been predicting this since 2008, and even though none of these predictions ever come true, people still keep paying him to predict the Apple TV "really soon".
These hucksters work like most, relying on the fact that most people don't remember what they heard before and don't bother checking facts when someone tells them what they want to hear. They also reinforce each other. So, with no real evidence at all, Gene Munster will say "Apple is expected to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then someone like Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty chimes in with a report that "analysts are reporting that Apple is expected to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then an unknown blogger desperate for hit counts puts the two together with a blog that says "analysts are expecting Apple to introduce an Apple HD Television at Macworld 2011". Then Gene issues another prediction, quoting Katy and desperate blogger .............
So then Macworld 2011 comes around, and guess what, no Apple TV. Well, of course there is the $99 one that Apple sells in huge numbers, just not the one that needs to walk out of an Apple Store on the back of a large truck. Everyone forgets that Gene Munster said the same thing in 2008 and it wasn't true, Gene Munster said the same thing in 2009 and it wasn't true, Gene Munster said the same thing in 2010 and it wasn't true and now Gene Munster said the same thing in 2011 and it wasn't true, allowing the same Gene Munster to say the same thing in 2012 and tech journos and bloggers will still expect it to be true,
...
Anyone who has bought a wide-arse TV recently knows the following:
- they come in different sizes. Even if you discount below 1080p, there are 32, 40, 46 and 55 - inchers at affordable prices
- they come in different models. Even though the differences may be marginal, there is always a "Good, Better, Best" range of options. For each size, Best is often twice the price of Good
- they come come out with different features at least every year. However, no-one buys a new tellie every year. Unlike PC's, people don't even buy a new tellie every three years, it's more like 5 to 10
- the price changes. After a few months, you can buy the same model for two thirds of list price. A year later they are half price
- they come with different technical specs for different parts of the world
...
So, even if Apple was prepared to develop dozens of new models every year, and face cut-throat competition from other TV makers, this scenario ignores the most obvious thing that Apple could do to sell EVEN MORE $99 Apple TV modules:
Oh wait, the Munstervision also ignores the fact that in between Munster starting on his quest, when the Apple TV was a big expensive HDTV add-on, and now, Steve Jobs was seen discussing the difficulties for Apple of getting involved in the TV business. People not willing to pay a little bit more for a higher quality product was one factor mentioned. Then after that the new Apple TV became a compact, inexpensive HDTV add-on ...........
Somehow, I think that when Apple introduced the compact, inexpensive Apple TV, Jobs may have been *just hoping* it would solve some of the difficulties he had been talking about ...........
....
So, where was I? Oh yes, the most obvious thing that Apple could do to sell EVEN MORE $99 Apple TV modules:
at heart, the Apple TV is a tiny computer running the same Unix-based OS as the iPhone or the iPad. It does not have any storage beyond a small flash chip, cannot make phone calls and it's not mobile, but it has two VERY BIG advantages: 1. it is connected to the internet and 2. it is connected to a big-arse TV. We know that Apple has been having LULZ with connections between the iPhone, the iPad and your big-arse TV via the AppleTV, but so far the AppleTV has been just a dumb junction box ..........
however, the Apple TV is still a computer running the same OS as the iPhone or the iPad. It could also run the same Apps, if Apple let it. How so, with no storage?
Well, perhaps it could make use of a thing called iCloud .........
...
Now if Gene Munster somehow had a clue, then what Apple has been building over the past few years in North Carolina would have been a television factory. Even Gene should now be aware that it's not a television factory, it's a data centre. A BIG ONE. Gene may also have heard that Apple has been investing in big buildings in Japan. Television factories? well, maybe, but we already have television factories here and in Korea ...........
Now I am not an overpaid "Wall Street Analyst" like Gene, nor the genius and/or evil mastermind behind Apple like Steve Jobs, but I would hazard a guess that if the AppleTV could be coaxed into running iPhone Apps on your TV, while allowing your iPhone or iPad to get involved in the action, many more people would see the value in buying a $99 Apple TV module (while you're spending a grand or so buying the TV) and then buying $1 - $10 games rather than, say a $300 games console and $10 - $20 games. I would also guess that if this becomes possible, the iCloud may be there to make up for the lack of storage on the AppleTV ............
Of course, I could be entirely wrong about this. Rather than the AppleTV allowing Apple to enter and dominate computer gaming, it could be that Apple's plans are for the AppleTV allowing Apple to enter and dominate the online video and TV download and rental market .....................
Surely not both ??????
Looking at the care Apple has given this particular logo (read: golden ratio) and what I believe Apple wants the iCloud to be I think that makes a lot of sense. I can see this in the corner of a TV's frame at big box stores.
For those that don't really understand the golden ratio,
Golden Ratio for Humans
- A large Apple TV with logo is a great way for Apple to make their presence in the living room known. If they go in with a big push a TV is the way to show it off.
- Perfect iCloud / iPad or iPhone / iTunes integration
- Great user interface
But - no mater how clever the hardware, content is King and Apple needs to find a way to work with the content providers. If Apple could find a way for cable co's to be comfortably presented through the Apple gui / epg without loosing face or without feeling threatened (like Netflix on ATV) then this could be HUGE.An Apple TV will not be about the hardware on its own, it will be about the Apple eco-system and about controlling the living room.
1) work with the TV manufacturers to include AirPlay support in their TVs
2) Create an "Apple TV" app for the iPhone/iPad, or make sure that all of the equivalent functionality of the Apple TV is available within the existing apps - along with AirPlay support. For example they might add the ability to "rent" a movie from the iTunes app and push it to an AirPlay device.
And if you have a TV without AirPlay support, you buy the $99 Apple TV and you're set.
Why not just an aTV with HDMI inputs? Most newer equipment can be controlled through the HDMI cable, thus allowing your iphone/ipod/ipad to become your one and only remote.
I want real buttons. I don't think having to look at your remote and hold it with one hand while swiping with the other is as convenient as a tactile interface.
it's just going to be a giant ipad or an enormous iphone. :d
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct1_r_61sk8
lmao!!!!!!