Apple television rumored to come in 3 sizes, including 32" and 55"

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 109
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rtm135 View Post


    I just read about the Xbox update coming out on Dec 6 and I don't see how an Apple TV could beat this.



    Better UI and UE. That, combines with a willingness to buy a REV 1 product and to believe promises of future capability upgrades.



    Using a console as a super duper access portal is a kludge to start with.
  • Reply 82 of 109
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    wondering if Tim Cook can create the reality distortion field and convince us once again that Apple has just created another 4-year-old technology. multi-touch, siri, et al.



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvuwgA2Gbys



    You have triggered every keyword to indicate you are trolling but I'll ask anyway. What doe the timeframe between when a tech was first demoed in some way and when a consumer product gets a workable, advance version of that tech have to do with anything?



    Siri in the 4S is worlds above the standalone app, which is worlds above what it was before the Nuance addition, and world above when it was a government project. I don't get why Siri in the 4S is somehow not increasing the UX in way that has never been before for that technology simply because it wasn't all invented by Apple in the last week.



    As for your video, that is not a good demo. It's slow to respond and takes more effort than hitting a button. Also, have you every tried to use CoverFlow for everything iTunes/iPod. It has some nifty visual features and is great if the image of an album is all you know, but it's not more user friendly option for accessing data quickly and easily. I can't imagine a TV show would work with this.



    BTW, sensors that recognize human movements have been around a lot longer than 4 years, much less the janky 2009 demo shown in the link. And OLED…the 1950s.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post


    And ur a global moderator? Ugh!



    He's a Mod, not an Admin for the forum. I don't expect any mod to adjust their posting style simply because of his new designation, but the flip side of that coin is that you can openly disagree with him without fear of getting banned.
  • Reply 83 of 109
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Okay, I'll pick on you. You're the third person I've seen mention this nonsense, and it's getting to be bothersome.



    What does my being a moderator have to do with anything?



    Do you think that you should be allowed to present your guesses as facts? Do you think that that's an appropriate way to present your opinions (because until Apple says so, that's all they are)?



    If so, become a tech analyst. Otherwise people are going to criticize you for it, and you'll have to live with that.



    Actually, people will criticize you MORE if you become an analyst because they'll assume you're always wrong. Which is really just being stereotypical and unfair to analysts, but they certainly DO seem to fit that stereotype as though it's their job to do so?



    Tell the people your duties here on the AI forum. They might get off your back and be grateful for your selfless assistance as a member.
  • Reply 84 of 109
    kent909kent909 Posts: 731member
    After reading many of these posts, I better understand why Jobs did not believe in focus groups.
  • Reply 85 of 109
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kent909 View Post


    After reading many of these posts, I better understand why Jobs did not believe in focus groups.



    The first iPhone would've had a physical keyboard and 3G.



    And people would be incredulous as to why it was so terrible?



    "But they gave us everything we asked for!" they said?
  • Reply 86 of 109
    Exciting... looking forward to some more detailed info and specs. Hoping for the best when they launch it, truly hope it's revolutionary especially since Steve set the guidance. And love that the TV makers are already nervous and trying to guess and make their best guess 'answer' TVs first.
  • Reply 87 of 109
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    I don't think you understood my post at all, so I must not have been sufficiently clear. I'll try harder.



    Apple's ultimate goal should be to destroy the existing system completely. Once that happens, "watching TV" should mean that there is no bluray player or cable box. All paid content would come to a TV in the same way that it comes to an iPad -- through the iTunes/App store, and that happens over 802.lln connected to the Internet (that's the enforced standard). (unpaid content can stream over the local wi-fi from your Mac, iPad, iPhone, etc)



    The problem is in getting from here to there. And for that, there needs to be a connection to the existing world. I'm proposing that connection would be a wireless link from the Apple TV to an Apple-branded piece of hardware that would connect to the existing rat's nest of receiver, etc. Because that wireless link is between two apple devices, there is no need for standards enforcement -- it can be whatever wireless technology apple chooses. That Apple-branded piece of hardware (as I said -- you can think of it as being analogous to an airport express) would provide the physical connectivity (hdmi, optical audio) that is needed to relate to the existing hardware mess we all have to live with. This would allow us to shed those legacy devices gradually rather than all at once. This is essential, because not all content will be available through the iTunes/AppStore model from day 1, and people won't want to give up that content. So, practical example -- you connect your cable box to the AirportExpress and the AirportExpress wireless streams the video to the AppleTV. You still have to control the cable box using the remote.



    But by keeping the rat's nest at a wireless arm's distance from the AppleTV, the AppleTV itself is uncorrupted. When you are finally able to shed that last piece of legacy equipment, the AppleTV you're left with will be the AppleTV you always wanted -- no extra cables, super simple -- just an invisible antenna that used to communicate with the AirportExpress-like device that provided the physical link to the rat's nest.



    I think something like this is essential... the AppleTV has to be both capable of eventually totally replacing the current system while at the same time coexisting with the current system.



    Your rats-nest connection box with a wireless link to the TV has already been done by Panasonic. Several years ago:



    Quote:

    The best feature to flaunt about Panasonic TC-P54Z1 Widescreen Plasma Display is the Wireless connectivity of the telly. Being a DLNA certified screen, this television offers extensive network capabilities and connectivity options. This is one of the handful televisions that can offer uncompressed Full HD 1080p wireless transmission. A separate media receiver is issued along with the display in which the processing unit is installed. All you have to do is to connect the devices to the HD media receiver, and further transmission can be done to the display without any messy wires.







    The nice thing about these is that the display can be wall mounted with only the need to provide a power connection to it. Everything else connects to the box which obviously can be concealed.



    As is so often the problem with AI, this discussion is rather too USA centric. There are numerous TV systems in use world wide and one box won't suit all. Panasonics idea is rather cool and elegant. If the actual tuner section within the box were an easy to swap module, that would make a lot of sense.



    Here in Europe, there is quite a mish-mash of delivery systems. Fibre, cable, OTA and Satellite being the main ones, with the latter being very big. Their are also numerous flavours of OTA DT systems



    My current TV is a Panasonic 50" Plasma with an integrated HD Satellite receiver via which I can view all the FTA UK based Satellite channels. It's Mpeg4 decoder also lets me receive the Irish terrestrial digital channels.



    What could Apple offer me to 'improve' things. Not much that I can think of. The UK Satellite Freeview system already includes an integrated all channel, on-screen, Program guide.



    People who think DSL broadband is good enough, or affordable enough to provide HD TV content must already have good connections at a cheap rate. A lot of Europe doesn't and wont for some time.



    The only way I can see Apple changing the game world-wide is with a fleet of their own Satellites linking to something like the Panasonic system above with a local modular Tuner, with the resulting interface providing the user with a single screen program guide unifying all content available from all sources connected to the box; from whats coming from the satellite, whats in the DVD player, what's on the local DT channels to what downloaded content is available on the iMac or media server.



    Apple having their own fleet of HD broadcast satellites would be politically interesting.



    Siri doesn't attract me. I do not want to talk to a remote.
  • Reply 88 of 109
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    It feels really unlikely Apple would jump into the actual TV market. There is no way for Apple to beat the rest of the field in display quality, tuner quality and price. Then there's the problem that TVs have no "right" size as much as desktop displays have, and shipping TVs - especially multiple models - is a huge logistics volume challenge.



    I wonder to what extent they could control an existing TV from an external AppleTV box via HDMI-CEC. Maybe they could push to expand that standard. And they could find partners on the TV side whose TVs get certified as "AppleTV compatible"?
  • Reply 89 of 109
    shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member
    From what I've seen and read the two most popular sizes around the world are 32" and 40" so I would expect them to go with that. Whatever the size I just hope they ditch the horrid black band around the screen and go with an edge to edge display.



    Edit: I think the rumour is that Sharp will be supplying the screens for any Apple TV. I just had a look on their website and their own smart TVs go up to 80".
  • Reply 90 of 109
    i think people will be like they were towards the iPad when they first saw it, basically didn't think much of it and steve felt hurt at first people didn't get it, it wasn't and till they started using and playing with it that they got it and it went C4 BOOOOOM!



    Siri will be in it, with more, the other point needs addressing is competitive pricing and still make money and not lose money in this area like the other companies, if any one can do it its Apple....





    In Apple We Trust!!!!
  • Reply 91 of 109
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,483member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    From what I've seen and read the two most popular sizes around the world are 32" and 40" so I would expect them to go with that. Whatever the size I just hope they ditch the horrid black band around the screen and go with an edge to edge display.



    Edit: I think the rumour is that Sharp will be supplying the screens for any Apple TV. I just had a look on their website and their own smart TVs go up to 80".



    I was just looking at a Sharp 80 the other day. Everything else just looks so small now!
  • Reply 92 of 109
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's anticipated high-end 55-inch model is expected to compete with "smart TVs" from established television makers like Samsung and LG. Those companies' next-generation TV sets are expected to have new features like faster processors, a "combination of OLED display," and "Super HD" from LG, the report said.



    Well, As much as I'd like to see but hate to see it, "Super HD", or Ultra HD (i.e. 33.5 megapixel) as described in Wikipedia is still and experimental technology and I doubt we're going to see this any time soon. Heck, Apple can't even figure out how to stream 1080p efficiently enough to even consider Beta testing, so I think this article is full of crap.



    I hate these articles. They just build a false sense of hope, so when the actual Apple HDTV comes out, the media can bash apple for not delivering what the rumors suggest.



    Seriously? A retina display for your TV? is this really necessary? And I suppose all the Movie company's are doing this because Blu-ray wasn't as successful as their internal predictions suggest? And then they're going to try and Stream this? You're joking right?



    Someone please give me a logical answer to why we need Siri in the TV? They are really going to have to do something about background noise if they want this to be successful. The iPhone4S noise cancelling isn't good enough as it is. And what about the hearing impaired, and other accessibility concerns?
  • Reply 93 of 109
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,483member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post


    Well, As much as I'd like to see but hate to see it, "Super HD", or Ultra HD (i.e. 33.5 megapixel) as described in Wikipedia is still and experimental technology and I doubt we're going to see this any time soon. Heck, Apple can't even figure out how to stream 1080p efficiently enough to even consider Beta testing, so I think this article is full of crap.



    I hate these articles. They just build a false sense of hope, so when the actual Apple HDTV comes out, the media can bash apple for not delivering what the rumors suggest.



    Seriously? A retina display for your TV? is this really necessary? And I suppose all the Movie company's are doing this because Blu-ray wasn't as successful as their internal predictions suggest? And then they're going to try and Stream this? You're joking right?



    Someone please give me a logical answer to why we need Siri in the TV? They are really going to have to do something about background noise if they want this to be successful. The iPhone4S noise cancelling isn't good enough as it is. And what about the hearing impaired, and other accessibility concerns?



    This is a rumor site you know
  • Reply 94 of 109
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I was just looking at a Sharp 80 the other day. Everything else just looks so small now!



    Yes, especially the prices, given that Sharp costs $5500 (£3500)



    If Samsung come through with the rumoured 55" OLED TV, I think I would rather that than the Sharp, if the prices were comparable.
  • Reply 95 of 109
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmm View Post


    Bleck... I just want to see ghetto siri appear in the app store .



    Siri WAS in the app store and [once again] i'm VERY upset that they ended all of it's functionality as soon as the 4S was released. i used it almost every day for close to a year on my iPhone 4.
  • Reply 96 of 109
    xsuxsu Posts: 401member
    TV's problem is not with the TV hardware itself. Apple can create the best interface to a TV this side of the universe, but if we still gets programming from cable and satellite providers, we'll have to deal with their box and their interface.



    If Apple bypass those providers, then it's really a streaming service. So it's not fundamentally different from what AppleTV provides today, but maybe in a much better way.
  • Reply 97 of 109
    I'm a couple of years past due for a new living room HDTV. I'll really be interested in this if it either:



    1. There is a content package available that will give me access to all of the current content that I watch on Comcast, including live news and sports, or



    2. Comcast says it will make all of its features accessible on it without a cable box.



    I think the latter is much MUCH more likely, but I'm not anti-Comcast as much as wanting a smooth user experience with as much cable (and frankly Blue-ray) integration as possible.



    I don't want to use one remote to pick the source, another to choose channels, and a third to operate the Blu-ray. I don't want a third-party universal remote that figures out all the handshakes if you give it the right codes. I want a remote that is designed to operate everything and a TV/cable/Blu-ray device that is designed to work as a unified device.
  • Reply 98 of 109
    leave the integrated electronics out of it... period. I usually keep a TV for 5 or more years. I like the idea of the Apple TV as it is, but make it a plug in card that goes into the back of the TV. Hell, make it so it works with other brands just like the apple TV does now. Don't put the processor in the TV. But... that is the way it will most likely happen. By the end of 2012 there shouldn't be anything worth watching on TV at all. ha!
  • Reply 99 of 109
    You decide (and note the dates on these old emails I sent to my buddy)...





    From: Derrick Roberts

    Date: September 8, 2010 5:17:06 PM EDT

    To: Charles Shorb

    Subject: Re: Inching closer...





    I think Apple's new NC-based datacenter will end up getting us most of the rest of the way to where I was headed over 2 years ago (see below).



    Now...on to the next big thing. Think about "Faces" in iPhoto....and "FaceTime"....and the new AppleTV which can retrieve and stream content....



    I think we will soon hear about the ability to make/take FaceTime calls from the family room tv. A call comes into your iPhone...it's Uncle Clark and he wants to do FaceTime. With the press of a button, the call (already passing through your wi-fi network) is shifted over to the AppleTV and blammo...Uncle Clark's mug is on the widescreen LCD tv (thanks to the "iMicroCam"...part microphone...part camera...that sits on top of your TV and captures the sights and sounds of the call). Think about a couple of aspects/options...perhaps the iMicroCam is actually just a dock of some sort that you plop your iPhone into. The call is already underway on your phone but that dock is connected to your AppleTV to direct the signal through to the media room's big screen. Maybe the dock or the stand-alone camera/microphone can swivel and track you and can zoom out if/when it realizes that you are in the recliner, the wife is on the loveseat and Jr. is running all over the field of view. But if you start talking and nobody else's voice/face is taking part in your side of the call, maybe it zooms in a bit. As for Uncle Clark, the system recognizes his Face and displays an opaque side bar of photo albums, documents, emails, etc. that have been associated with his face and/or contact record. I mentioned the possibility of a "dock" but you can actually scratch that....the standalone camera/mic hardware is better for a couple of reasons....1) it's new hardware and that means new revenue for Apple (or 3rd party vendors) and 2) you don't NEED an iPhone to make this happen given Apple's open-source approach to FaceTime. You can be sitting in the living room watching a movie that you're streaming through your Apple TV from Netflix and here comes an overlay telling you that Uncle Clark wants to connect with you. If you accept the call, your streaming content pauses and the call becomes the focus.



    Like it?



    D









    On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Derrick Roberts wrote:



    I'd still like to know when we can reach a point where some combination of compression and streaming rates will enable us to get C.O.D. (Content On Demand).

    The mothership (Apple perhaps) hosts the content (which they already do)

    They manage the rights/licensing (which they also currently do through their "authorize up to 5 machines" program)

    They serve up content as it's requested (already kinda doing this with Apple Movie Rentals, right? What I don't know is what physically happens to a piece of content when the rental expires. Does it automatically get removed from your hardware? Or is it still there but in an expired and unplayable state? In either case, I could see an interface where you'd have the option to manage local retention periods. The point is, you don't need a 2TB iPod, iPhone, AppleTV, AppleDVR or whatever in order to have easy access to all of your content. You authorize your compatible devices (PC, Mac, the above named devices, etc.) and any one (or more) of them can fetch the content (owned, rented, subscribed, personal, etc.) On Demand.

    Any content obtained from the iTunes store (music, video, podcasts, audiobooks, iPod games, iPhone apps, etc) can/will be hosted on and served from Apple's servers free of charge.

    Any content obtained by any other method (ripped a CD that I own, pics off my digital camera, home movies, files and documents I've created, etc.) could be hosted on and served from Apple's servers based on some pricing scheme that is yet to-be-determined.
  • Reply 100 of 109
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,618member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    To make a TV as glossy as an iMac or MacBook Pro would be crazy. Imagine watching a dark movie with all that gloss - brutal. You'd have to have a completely black room.



    That's true for most HDTVs. They all have glossy screens, no?



    And as for the report claiming that LG is releasing 2012 OLED sets in large sizes, I find that very hard to believe unless it's super-high end or a concept model. Hardly anyone has released any OLED as yet except for Sony's 11" model from a few years ago. 2012 is not suddenly going to give us revolutionary changes in size/cost.



    LG sets are not especially highly rated. Those honors go to the former Pioneer Kuro line, and the high end models of Sony, Panasonic (Plasma), Sharp Elite and an occassional Samsung.
Sign In or Register to comment.