Remember the headlines about tablet makers waiting to see what Apple were building? And we all know how that went....
Except here they'll waste their money on building TVs and then *poof*, Apple comes out with a brand new Apple TV box for $99 with an A6 processor and the best interface in the industry and streaming deals with half of the channels in existence.
Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said in a note to investors this week that Apple is expected to partner with Sharp for TFT-LCD panels for its so-called "iTV."
I can't imagine many people would pay the Apple premium for an LCD TV just because the remote has Siri functionality.
I would need several features before I paid through the nose for an Apple flat-panel TV. Siri functionality added to the current Apple TV hardware/software package would be a nice bundle. A Jonathon Ives design would be great, too. But I'd also need an insanely great picture.
The only way I see Apple marketing its own TV is if it has some new display technology. Something like this: http://tinyurl.com/86nehtv
Apple's expected entrance into the television market is said to have sent other TV makers "scrambling" to identify what the features of the product may be.
See? That's their problem. Instead, they should be figuring out what the features of the product WILL NOT be.
Apple's genius is not what features they include, but instead, what features they leave out.
Like the iPhone and the iPad, the iTV remote will have only one button. It will turn the set on if it is off, and allow you to scroll through a list (placed on a turning drum) of the content now available.
Press the button twice, and the show comes on. Easy. Everything in a single serial interface. Just like coverflow, or any of Apple's other serial interfaces.
ITV will be easy and simple. Just ONE button. Simple enough that a caveman could do it.
Great, so when I am in the middle of a program and the kid comes through the living room whining "I wanna watch cartoon network" the TV will change channels?
Or - with the TV something like 15 feet away from me - "Find Mythbusters" - "Find MYTHBUSTERS" - "FIND MYTHBUSTERS" - "FIND MYTH BUSTERS" - oh forget it.
You really don't think Apple would have thought of that? I think you are confusing it with something Google would put out.
I don't buy this rumor. Apple wouldn't be this foolish. This isn't a market they would enter at this point. After all, the latest Apple TV sells ok, but its not a hot seller. Apple isn't going to enter the very crowded HDTV market with a TV that has an Apple TV built in. Also, consider that Apple doesn't even have all the networks on board for streaming content. No way this will happen.
I believe you're missing the point. Example: In my living room I have a TV, a Stereo, a Blu-Ray player, a cable box, and probably something else I can't remember. They all have remotes. They cover the top of the coffee table and my wife wants to stand me up against the wall and throw them at me.
In the master bedroom there is a TV and an Apple TV. There are two remotes. If the volume controls were on the Apple Remote, there would be only one remote with a grand total of five buttons. My wife loves it. ONE remote, THREE buttons (plus the other with the volume controls).
Put on your seat belts. Apple is about to do to TV's what they did to phones. Sure, they may have single digits of market share, but they will have more than half of the profits. And, at most FIVE buttons!
It doesn't have to compete with the cable companies. In fact, it could partner with some or all. Now- I think it would be soooo difficult to team with cox, Time Warner, Uverse, dish network, directv, Comcast, Fios, etc, etc. BUT- if it had all the chipsets for the cable companies where all the boxes were integrated in the TV (similarly to the new 4S but on a larger scale), that would be revolutionary in its own right.
Content won't happen. Period. One reason- sports (amongst another 1000 reasons). Please everyone, spare me the "I can get NHL and MLB on my apple tv now". Sure- but not your local team- which is what 95% of the people watch.
I don't think it will happen for a while. BUT... If it did- here is my realistic wish list that could be accomplished:
-Built in apple tv with a handful of additional features (such as weather, stocks, Hulu and the Internet- like on PS3 or Wii, but with much better interface).
-Built in Blu-Ray player (this is realistic for a TV...)
-Built in cable box chipsets
-Built in small hard drive for recording programs
-Siri controlled remote
That's it. The key is everything needs to be all in one and built in (the only way Siri would work changing channels). That way Siri will be the selling point. The 2nd is no cables. Just 1 power cord. I also think there shouldn't be apps. That'd be weird. I also think the hard drive should only record and not allow music and movies to be stored. Both of these are for 2 reasons- the apple ecosystem.
-want games? AirPlay from iPhone and iPad.
-want to stream music and movies? Stream from your Mac, iPhone, iPad, or iTunes acct).
Keep them coming back. This could be done- and could charge a $500 premium. How much are cable chips, an A5 or A6, a small hard drive and a Blu ray player? $100? Maybe? Those are the margins apple loves.
I can't imagine many people would pay the Apple premium for an LCD TV just because the remote has Siri functionality. ...
Apple premium? What Apple premium?
Is there a "premium" on iPhones or iPads? No.
Is there a "premium" on MacBook Airs? No.
Is there a "premium" on the current Apple TV? No.
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
I could argue about the 15 and 17" MBPs and certainly the low end model of the Mac Pro. By and large tho no, there really isn't an Apple Tax anymore.
The only product that does not carry an Apple premium is the iPad. Macs and iPhones are definitely more expensive than what competing venders offer. To think otherwise is to delude yourself. Yes, Apple products are of much higher quality. But that is not an argument that the Apple premium does not exist. It partially explains why it does exist.
And the first reports of a new Apple TV, at least those that followed Mr. Isaacson's book, included speculation of the contraption costing two or three times more than today's LCD models.
Let's face it, if the company does get into the TV market, we know its gonna charge more than what other companies are only because the other companies are losing money on their TVs.
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
There will have to be a big premium if they hope to make money because the TV business has turned into a cutthroat no margin commodity business. Sony and Panasonic have lost Billions selling TVs.
Only the bare panel makers like LG/Samsung seem to be making any money.
Since Apple doesn't make panels they will be more like Sony if they decided to get into this market.
Apple will pull this off like they have with 90% of there other products.
Most MFG's would love to have half of Apple's success rate for launching products.
No company in the last decade has been more successful with entering a existing market space and flipping that market space on it's head (Music, Movies, Cloud, Touch, Tablets, Phones, Laptops, All-In-Ones, Media Production and last but not least Mobile Everything).
In all most every tech market Apple has entered the market was in disarray and had no focus or path forward.
It was always put all the coolest new tech on it whether it was useful or not or needed or not.
No one ever could have seen what was coming with the iPod touch, iPhone and iPad.
I remember people were blown away with the rice bowl iMac and the Mac MIni, no one could have imagined what apple was going to release.
Heck remember the org iMac with the translucent case?
MFG's are still producing new products with design a decade + later.
So to say they can't offer anything better or people wont pay for it is short sighted.
This is Apple were are looking at not some Asian copy/cloning company with no real design or R&D.
If there is any company out there that can do this it is Apple and probably will.
We have no idea what they are going to launch but when they do the industry, critics and fans will all say "Of coarse! That is so obvious. Thats were the industry was already going".
Yet the entire industry has no clue today, but Apple will save it tomorrow.
I would love to see my Apple remote app work with Siri. People are missing the point with their idiotic rants about having to shout. If you want to search for a T.V. show it will be easier to use Siri than typing it out.
Me: "Find episodes of Breaking Bad."
Siri: "Okay here is a list of Channels Showing Breaking Bad. I've Listed them by time"
Then you tap one if it's currently showing.
Siri works just fine even with other people in the room. I am always demonstrating it at work for people when it comes to looking at weather or putting my work schedule in, then go on to show how Siri can help me find 'God'.
How would this work with my cable/sat box? Do the cable/sat companies provide API's that allow you to do this?
Where they could make an impact is on the content side and how that interacts with the hardware. There is nothing that exists at the moment that lets you watch what you want to, when you want to, through one simple easy-to-use interface.
This is very, very true, and it speaks to what Apple COULD actually do here.
How did they impact the music market? They eliminated the trip to Tower records, where it was hard or impossible to sample songs AND where they could be out of stock on an item.
How could they impact TV? In this case, the Tower Records-like middleman is your network and/or the cable provider, who tell you what you may or may not see. Netflix took a stab in this direction, by offering a wide variety of content on demand. What if Apple put together a package whereby you could get any TV content produced over, say, five years ago on demand? What if that package attracted so many users that every content provider HAD TO get on board, or miss out? What if the embargo were then cut from five years to two?
Netflix was on the right track, but they ran out of capital. Apple should scoop them up on the cheap and follow through with that idea. The TV should also come at a rock-bottom price, so that's not an issue. Apple's profit, in this case, would come via the razor blade model - a charge per episode sold.
Apple should also pay content providers whose content is more than a couple of years old a flat rate, like music royalties for radio use. This would attract all the small fish and create compelling volume. A different deal would have to be cut for newer content however.
The cable companies would fight this, but I don't see how they could win. Apple's bigger than the lot of 'em, and if they blocked Apple's service they'd get in legal hot water with the FCC and so on.
All this assumes there WILL be an AppleTV, which I still doubt. Everything I describe could be done via Apple's add-on box, so I still don't get why they would have to make the entire unit.
Comments
Remember the headlines about tablet makers waiting to see what Apple were building? And we all know how that went....
Except here they'll waste their money on building TVs and then *poof*, Apple comes out with a brand new Apple TV box for $99 with an A6 processor and the best interface in the industry and streaming deals with half of the channels in existence.
Jefferies analyst Peter Misek said in a note to investors this week that Apple is expected to partner with Sharp for TFT-LCD panels for its so-called "iTV."
I can't imagine many people would pay the Apple premium for an LCD TV just because the remote has Siri functionality.
I would need several features before I paid through the nose for an Apple flat-panel TV. Siri functionality added to the current Apple TV hardware/software package would be a nice bundle. A Jonathon Ives design would be great, too. But I'd also need an insanely great picture.
The only way I see Apple marketing its own TV is if it has some new display technology. Something like this: http://tinyurl.com/86nehtv
Apple's expected entrance into the television market is said to have sent other TV makers "scrambling" to identify what the features of the product may be.
See? That's their problem. Instead, they should be figuring out what the features of the product WILL NOT be.
Apple's genius is not what features they include, but instead, what features they leave out.
Like the iPhone and the iPad, the iTV remote will have only one button. It will turn the set on if it is off, and allow you to scroll through a list (placed on a turning drum) of the content now available.
Press the button twice, and the show comes on. Easy. Everything in a single serial interface. Just like coverflow, or any of Apple's other serial interfaces.
ITV will be easy and simple. Just ONE button. Simple enough that a caveman could do it.
Great, so when I am in the middle of a program and the kid comes through the living room whining "I wanna watch cartoon network" the TV will change channels?
Or - with the TV something like 15 feet away from me - "Find Mythbusters" - "Find MYTHBUSTERS" - "FIND MYTHBUSTERS" - "FIND MYTH BUSTERS" - oh forget it.
You really don't think Apple would have thought of that? I think you are confusing it with something Google would put out.
I don't buy this rumor. Apple wouldn't be this foolish. This isn't a market they would enter at this point. After all, the latest Apple TV sells ok, but its not a hot seller. Apple isn't going to enter the very crowded HDTV market with a TV that has an Apple TV built in. Also, consider that Apple doesn't even have all the networks on board for streaming content. No way this will happen.
THAT IS WHAT THEY SAID ABOUT iPHONE !!...LOL
I really don't buy this rumor at all.
TV isn't that complicated that it needs fixing.
I believe you're missing the point. Example: In my living room I have a TV, a Stereo, a Blu-Ray player, a cable box, and probably something else I can't remember. They all have remotes. They cover the top of the coffee table and my wife wants to stand me up against the wall and throw them at me.
In the master bedroom there is a TV and an Apple TV. There are two remotes. If the volume controls were on the Apple Remote, there would be only one remote with a grand total of five buttons. My wife loves it. ONE remote, THREE buttons (plus the other with the volume controls).
Put on your seat belts. Apple is about to do to TV's what they did to phones. Sure, they may have single digits of market share, but they will have more than half of the profits. And, at most FIVE buttons!
Content won't happen. Period. One reason- sports (amongst another 1000 reasons). Please everyone, spare me the "I can get NHL and MLB on my apple tv now". Sure- but not your local team- which is what 95% of the people watch.
I don't think it will happen for a while. BUT... If it did- here is my realistic wish list that could be accomplished:
-Built in apple tv with a handful of additional features (such as weather, stocks, Hulu and the Internet- like on PS3 or Wii, but with much better interface).
-Built in Blu-Ray player (this is realistic for a TV...)
-Built in cable box chipsets
-Built in small hard drive for recording programs
-Siri controlled remote
That's it. The key is everything needs to be all in one and built in (the only way Siri would work changing channels). That way Siri will be the selling point. The 2nd is no cables. Just 1 power cord. I also think there shouldn't be apps. That'd be weird. I also think the hard drive should only record and not allow music and movies to be stored. Both of these are for 2 reasons- the apple ecosystem.
-want games? AirPlay from iPhone and iPad.
-want to stream music and movies? Stream from your Mac, iPhone, iPad, or iTunes acct).
Keep them coming back. This could be done- and could charge a $500 premium. How much are cable chips, an A5 or A6, a small hard drive and a Blu ray player? $100? Maybe? Those are the margins apple loves.
I can't imagine many people would pay the Apple premium for an LCD TV just because the remote has Siri functionality. ...
Apple premium? What Apple premium?
Is there a "premium" on iPhones or iPads? No.
Is there a "premium" on MacBook Airs? No.
Is there a "premium" on the current Apple TV? No.
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
You really don't think Apple would have thought of that? I think you are confusing it with something Google would put out.
Like face recognition that is defeated with a photo?
Apple reinvents the TV ....
... and Google copies it and sells it to all other TV manufacturers with Google Commercials ...
... and Microsoft cries about it two years later and copies it and says, "TVs are PCs too!" ...
So, the competition has nothing to worry about.
THAT IS WHAT THEY SAID ABOUT iPHONE !!...LOL
Completely different market. Completely different industry. Completely different margins and business styles.
Having said that, I don't believe Apple will be making an HDTV. Simply a non-hobby Apple TV.
... and Google copies it and sells it to all other TV manufacturers with Google Commercials?
Google will accuse Apple of copying them. Remember, the Google TV came out FIRST, so anything Apple does is obviously a copy of that.
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
I could argue about the 15 and 17" MBPs and certainly the low end model of the Mac Pro. By and large tho no, there really isn't an Apple Tax anymore.
And the first reports of a new Apple TV, at least those that followed Mr. Isaacson's book, included speculation of the contraption costing two or three times more than today's LCD models.
Let's face it, if the company does get into the TV market, we know its gonna charge more than what other companies are only because the other companies are losing money on their TVs.
Does Apple lose money on any of its products?
Apple premium? What Apple premium?
Is there really a "premium" on any Apple product these days, for what you get compared to the "competition"? I would say, no. The "Apple premium" argument is a relict from a bygone era. There isn't any reason to expect a "premium" on an Apple TV, if they were to make one.
There will have to be a big premium if they hope to make money because the TV business has turned into a cutthroat no margin commodity business. Sony and Panasonic have lost Billions selling TVs.
Only the bare panel makers like LG/Samsung seem to be making any money.
Since Apple doesn't make panels they will be more like Sony if they decided to get into this market.
Most MFG's would love to have half of Apple's success rate for launching products.
No company in the last decade has been more successful with entering a existing market space and flipping that market space on it's head (Music, Movies, Cloud, Touch, Tablets, Phones, Laptops, All-In-Ones, Media Production and last but not least Mobile Everything).
In all most every tech market Apple has entered the market was in disarray and had no focus or path forward.
It was always put all the coolest new tech on it whether it was useful or not or needed or not.
No one ever could have seen what was coming with the iPod touch, iPhone and iPad.
I remember people were blown away with the rice bowl iMac and the Mac MIni, no one could have imagined what apple was going to release.
Heck remember the org iMac with the translucent case?
MFG's are still producing new products with design a decade + later.
So to say they can't offer anything better or people wont pay for it is short sighted.
This is Apple were are looking at not some Asian copy/cloning company with no real design or R&D.
If there is any company out there that can do this it is Apple and probably will.
We have no idea what they are going to launch but when they do the industry, critics and fans will all say "Of coarse! That is so obvious. Thats were the industry was already going".
Yet the entire industry has no clue today, but Apple will save it tomorrow.
I would love to see my Apple remote app work with Siri. People are missing the point with their idiotic rants about having to shout. If you want to search for a T.V. show it will be easier to use Siri than typing it out.
Me: "Find episodes of Breaking Bad."
Siri: "Okay here is a list of Channels Showing Breaking Bad. I've Listed them by time"
Then you tap one if it's currently showing.
Siri works just fine even with other people in the room. I am always demonstrating it at work for people when it comes to looking at weather or putting my work schedule in, then go on to show how Siri can help me find 'God'.
How would this work with my cable/sat box? Do the cable/sat companies provide API's that allow you to do this?
Where they could make an impact is on the content side and how that interacts with the hardware. There is nothing that exists at the moment that lets you watch what you want to, when you want to, through one simple easy-to-use interface.
This is very, very true, and it speaks to what Apple COULD actually do here.
How did they impact the music market? They eliminated the trip to Tower records, where it was hard or impossible to sample songs AND where they could be out of stock on an item.
How could they impact TV? In this case, the Tower Records-like middleman is your network and/or the cable provider, who tell you what you may or may not see. Netflix took a stab in this direction, by offering a wide variety of content on demand. What if Apple put together a package whereby you could get any TV content produced over, say, five years ago on demand? What if that package attracted so many users that every content provider HAD TO get on board, or miss out? What if the embargo were then cut from five years to two?
Netflix was on the right track, but they ran out of capital. Apple should scoop them up on the cheap and follow through with that idea. The TV should also come at a rock-bottom price, so that's not an issue. Apple's profit, in this case, would come via the razor blade model - a charge per episode sold.
Apple should also pay content providers whose content is more than a couple of years old a flat rate, like music royalties for radio use. This would attract all the small fish and create compelling volume. A different deal would have to be cut for newer content however.
The cable companies would fight this, but I don't see how they could win. Apple's bigger than the lot of 'em, and if they blocked Apple's service they'd get in legal hot water with the FCC and so on.
All this assumes there WILL be an AppleTV, which I still doubt. Everything I describe could be done via Apple's add-on box, so I still don't get why they would have to make the entire unit.
How would this work with my cable/sat box? Do the cable/sat companies provide API's that allow you to do this?
No they don't, and as said in my previous post Apple has nothing to do in the cable/sat area. They need a connected TV with internet content.