NYT: Apple expected to release Siri-powered television by 2013

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 133
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    TV set should work well with speech recognition. Limited range of actions. Apple already have a database of TV show names so it will know what to listen for.



    Also maybe it's a hint that Apple expect the TV to take over from the phone, in the house.
  • Reply 82 of 133
    Me: Siri, I want to watch Femme Fatales on Cinemax



    Siri TV: Now, now, Apple prohibits the transmission of pornographic content.



    Me: You #*#$@!



    Siri TV: I'll pretend I didn't hear that.
  • Reply 83 of 133
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,729member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    TV set should work well with speech recognition. Limited range of actions. Apple already have a database of TV show names so it will know what to listen for.



    Also maybe it's a hint that Apple expect the TV to take over from the phone, in the house.



    I like the idea of phone integration. When the phone rings a little notification "Steve's calling" drops down where you have options to pause the tv, answer the call, FaceTime etc. A bit like the iPod on the iPhone. Obviously you'd have the option to hold all notifications.
  • Reply 84 of 133
    Soon... we'll all start talking to each other the way we talk to Siri...
  • Reply 85 of 133
    I don't get why Apple would go after the TV set market directly. If they wanted a Siri type experience, they could just add that to AppleTV, which seems like the more direct route to getting users. I mean, I'm sure that Apple knows what they're doing, but I feel like more customers would rather pay $100-$200 for a box than $2k for a new TV.
  • Reply 86 of 133
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by paxman View Post


    I like the idea of phone integration. When the phone rings a little notification "Steve's calling" drops down where you have options to pause the tv, answer the call, FaceTime etc. A bit like the iPod on the iPhone. Obviously you'd have the option to hold all notifications.



    Yes, that would be good, they could use the new iOS 5 notifications. Also, if you get a FaceTime call on your cellphone maybe you can transfer it to the TV using Airplay.
  • Reply 87 of 133
    whcirwhcir Posts: 29member
    Some people don't have any imagination. Don't you think Apple is capable of realizing that background noise could be a problem? First, you would most likely be using an iPhone or iPad to activate Siri and not yelling across the room at your TV. Second, Siri will get better with time, including improvements with filtering out ambient noise using the microphone at the top of the iPhone. Third, it's not hard to implement an integrated solution to avoid noise from the TV interfering with Siri. They could easily make the TV's volume lower when Siri is activated on the controlling device.
  • Reply 88 of 133
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by WhciR View Post


    Some people don't have any imagination. Don't you think Apple is capable of realizing that background noise could be a problem? First, you would most likely be using an iPhone or iPad to activate Siri and not yelling across the room at your TV. Second, Siri will get better with time, including improvements with filtering out ambient noise using the microphone at the top of the iPhone. Third, it's not hard to implement an integrated solution to avoid noise from the TV interfering with Siri. They could easily make the TV's volume lower when Siri is activated on the controlling device.



    We've thought about that. BlueTooth in the included remote control has a microphone so you can talk to Siri up close and personal. Also, Since the TV would know what audio it's pushing out it would also know what audio to cancel out (within reason).
  • Reply 89 of 133
    whcirwhcir Posts: 29member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    We've thought about that. BlueTooth in the included remote control has a microphone so you can talk to Siri up close and personal. Also, Since the TV would know what audio it's pushing out it would also know what audio to cancel out (within reason).



    There's a number of ways to solve these problems. I just read some of the early comments and shook my head, so I didn't get to comments that talked about the solutions. I just find it funny when people act like something won't work or isn't possible. And it seems like knowing the audio that is being pushed out and automatically canceling it is even better than lowering the volume because maybe you're using Siri for something other than the TV or don't want to disrupt the sound when other people are also watching it.
  • Reply 90 of 133
    whcirwhcir Posts: 29member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Drealoth View Post


    I don't get why Apple would go after the TV set market directly. If they wanted a Siri type experience, they could just add that to AppleTV, which seems like the more direct route to getting users. I mean, I'm sure that Apple knows what they're doing, but I feel like more customers would rather pay $100-$200 for a box than $2k for a new TV.



    Because a TV is needed to watch TV and a box is not. And sooner or later you're going to replace that $2,000 TV. I imagine that Apple will want to make more money on content though, since the life-cycle for TVs are probably longer than those for Macs.
  • Reply 91 of 133
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,431member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Drealoth View Post


    I don't get why Apple would go after the TV set market directly. If they wanted a Siri type experience, they could just add that to AppleTV, which seems like the more direct route to getting users. I mean, I'm sure that Apple knows what they're doing, but I feel like more customers would rather pay $100-$200 for a box than $2k for a new TV.



    Because a $2000 sales is preferable to a $100 sales. Why should Apple abdicate control over to the Samsungs and Sony's of the world when they've got a better ecosystem to leverage with iCloud and iTunes?



    There's nothing to prevent Apple from adding good features to the stand alone Apple TV and offering a more integrated and powerful solution with an Apple HDTV.



    It's not always either/or.
  • Reply 92 of 133
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by WhciR View Post


    Because a TV is needed to watch TV and a box is not.



    Computer.



    Quote:

    And sooner or later you're going to replace that $2,000 TV.



    And it'll give you peace of mind that your $99 box will plug in and work perfectly with your new TV rather than buying a new $4,000 Apple HDTV.
  • Reply 93 of 133
    gmhutgmhut Posts: 242member
    I wonder how it would work with a home theater AVR, a cable box. game console, etc. Unless it somehow controls your equipment backwards from the TV, you'd still need a universal remote for the AVR and all the devices that connect to it for surround sound audio. The only thing I control from my TV is turning on the TV itself. The rest is audio, channel selection, and input for other devices through the AVR.



    I guess the TV would be one big giant voice activated universal remote that controls other devices through an HT AVR?
  • Reply 94 of 133
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Because a $2000 sales is preferable to a $100 sales. Why should Apple abdicate control over to the Samsungs and Sony's of the world when they've got a better ecosystem to leverage with iCloud and iTunes?



    There's nothing to prevent Apple from adding good features to the stand alone Apple TV and offering a more integrated and powerful solution with an Apple HDTV.



    It's not always either/or.



    Yes, but a new, more capable $200 ATV box with 50-60% gross margin is better than a $2000 Apple HDTV with 10-15% gross margin, and we all know Apple is all about high margin. Plus the ATV box can address HDTV screens already owned. Could they offer both? Maybe....



    ...but....



    ....I'm not buying the Apple HDTV thing, it just doesn't fit their business model.
  • Reply 95 of 133
    am8449am8449 Posts: 392member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maury Markowitz View Post


    So, here's a question? why would I possibly want this?



    I consider my TV to be nothing other than a large monitor. I get inputs from a cable box, PS3 and an Apple TV. I can add new inputs, or remove old ones.

    ...

    For that matter, what it is the Apple TV doesn't have now? Live channels, and *all* content. That's it.

    ...

    So why would I buy a new TV to get *that*? Well, I wouldn't.



    These are legitimate concerns that I agree with.



    But if any company can wow us with a re-imagined tv, it would be Apple. I'm hoping the post-Steve team doesn't release one until it "magically" addresses all of these concerns.
  • Reply 96 of 133
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post


    Because a $2000 sales is preferable to a $100 sales.



    That statement only works if you assume that everything is about equal: unit sales, profits, etc. Even shipping and storing a $2000 TV can take up a lot of room that dozens of iPhones and iPads could use. Not a big issue for shipping (even though its size and weight would be more costly and an equivalently valued iPhones and iPads) or warehouse storage but stock room storage in Apple Stores could be a very real issue.



    You also limit yourself to the number of TV sets that can be used. Apple already uses industry standard connectors and adapters that make pretty much any digital monitor connect up to a Mac, not just there monitors. If they only had 3 TV sizes what would they be? What types of panels would they have? How much expandability would they offer? What happens if the AppleTV HW goes bad after 2 years but your TV is still great for another 5, just like with current monitors? What if they update the AppleTV to offer 3rd-party apps but the app you want needs the newer $2000 TV with the latest AppleTV HW?



    I don't see why licensing an "iCloud Inside" or "AppleTV" inside TV to OEMs is such a bad idea. Apple requires some basic HW requirements, including a place on the back to mount the AppleTV HW that will take over as the main system so that even when you switch inputs you can still see your AppleTV UI overlays and can always access the AppleTV UI system immediately.
  • Reply 97 of 133
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pt123 View Post


    What if you have home theater system and you have the sound up watching Transformers? Might be tough to filter out the noise. Maybe go downstairs where it is more quiet.



    I'm sure it will have some sort of content filtering since it knows the outgoing signal and can extract it from the mic input to isolate your voice (plus room acoustics). Might need to do something drastic like clap for it to pause then give commands.
  • Reply 98 of 133
    alfiejralfiejr Posts: 1,524member
    i'm curious - how many people here actually have used iPad apps with wireless Screen Mirroring on their HDTV via Apple TV yet?



    once you do that, it is hard to see how an "Apple HDTV" would make any better sense. in fact, it's inferior.



    an HDTV is just a big dumb monitor (with tuner, etc). even if you build "brains" inside it - a chip - that can run apps and stuff, with or without Siri voice UI, it still has just one big screen to display everything. if you want to display additional content as well as the main pix, you have to do a split screen or PIP. which only detracts from the overall experience. this is a generic problem with the current "smart TV's" from Samsung, Sony, and the rest that run basic apps or add web supplemental web content. and there is no way around it, ever. you only have one screen to work with, period, and it is several feet away from you too, so any text has to be big.



    whereas, when you add an iPad via ATV, you have two screens to work with at the same time - that big dumb monitior and the smart computer you are holding. this is vastly superior - the iPad can display all the extra info and all the UI controls, while the HDTV displays just the principal big image with no need for split screens or PIP.



    sure, Siri could be helpful, but to talk to the iPad, not the TV itself.



    yes, Apple could build ATV into an HDTV and get the same two screen result with an iPad. but as many note, you couldn't update the ATV hardware later on when it became obsolete.
  • Reply 99 of 133
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    ... maybe it's a hint that Apple expect the TV to take over from the phone, in the house.



    People still have phones in their house?
  • Reply 100 of 133
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GMHut View Post


    I wonder how it would work with a home theater AVR, a cable box. game console, etc. Unless it somehow controls your equipment backwards from the TV, you'd still need a universal remote for the AVR and all the devices that connect to it for surround sound audio. The only thing I control from my TV is turning on the TV itself. The rest is audio, channel selection, and input for other devices through the AVR.



    I guess the TV would be one big giant voice activated universal remote that controls other devices through an HT AVR?



    I'm not sure what the hell an "AVR" is, but an Apple branded TV would almost certainly not connect to any of that stuff. If we are lucky it might have a single HDMI port. It sure isn't going to connect to your cable box.
Sign In or Register to comment.