The stock is not going to tank just because they releass a TV... Even if it doesnt work, the stock price is based on valuation of all Apple products, and its already pretty cheap right now.
First off, when I make predictions on Apple, I am batting about 85%, sometimes I am 100% balls on. But the thoughts that I have I don't want to jinx it for Apple, it's too out there, but I want Apple to get into the negotiations without me hinting on it. Sorry, but I would love to share it with you. There are probably about 5 or 6 companies that I would target for Apple to acquire over the next 3 years. but right now, they seem to be focusing on mfg these Apple HDTV boxes and I think they have to split the mfg between China and Germany because TVs are big and costly to ship worldwide. Buying Loewe, from my point of view, gives them the ability to mfg different sizes and ship the product to various countries. Plus, they have engineers at Loewe that can help with future products and they have other products that fit nicely with what Apple doesn't have. But these other companies that I feel Apple should buy, I don't want to say a word right now, because it might be too premature and I don't want certain others to beat Apple to the punch.
Ah, the old; "I know things you don't know, but I can't tell you, so you have to trust that I actually know this stuff, even though I can't prove any of it.", gambit.
Given how old of a company this is, is there any chance they have some important patents relating to TV technology?
You don't want old patents. You want new patents. If its older than about 15 years, and you don't already have products based upon it, then it's not very useful.
Is 50% regarded in Acquisition bids as a "slight premium"? Seems pretty substantial to me.
A normal premium is about 30%. If you epwant the company badly enough, and you want to take it out of contention, you offer enough so the board can't think they. Old get more elsewhere. This is what Google did when they bought Motorola. The premium was something like 85%.
Well if th $99 box can't give me what I have with DirecTV I have no reason to buy it. TV is not that complicated. My DirecTV box is very easy to use. When I had Dish Networks it was the same (though they didn't have all the content DirecTV does). I'm not sure what Apple is going to perfect or what Jobs thought he cracked.
Now there are those who would prefer to just pay for the shows/ channels they want rather than paying for a package full of channels they never want. If that's what Apple is attempting to crack then it's a whole lot more than perfecting the UI. Then we're talking about content and distribution. And I'm skeptical that Apple will be able to break the cable/satellite control of TV. TV is not the same as music was back in the early 00's when people were using file sharing to illegally acquire music. I can't see TV networks or movie studios bending over for Apple just because, well, it's Apple.
Its near impossible for Apple to compete with cable on content because of vertical integration. Lots of channels are now own by cable companies. In canada its even worst, almost all of the stations and channels are own by Cable or DSL companies.
Btw where I live we have a la carte programming. We dont have to buy the tv packages. This trend may spread so dont give up hope on that.
This makes perfect sense. All the rumblings and actions being taken do point to Apple getting into the TV biz. It definitely does remind me of all the hoopla going on before the iPhone was finally released. That being said, I agree with those who say that the only real differentiator will be software and content related. Great industrial design will help and there'll be millions who would buy a dumb panel with the Apple logo slapped on it, but for the long-term viability of an Apple HDTV set, it'll be all about how the interface accesses an expanded iTunes content base integrated with iCloud.
I've felt the TV world has been broken for years. I finally got fed up and ditched the normal service after going through standard cable (Cox), satellite (DirecTV), and Verizon's FiOS TV. I just have the Apple TV now with a Netflix account but it's really not much more than an online rental service of which there are many. It's really not a "traditional" TV. But since I find the great majority of TV programming to be trash, I don't mind the limited capabilities. I've never been much of a TV watcher at all. The only thing I really miss is live sports but I'm not the sports fan that I used to be either so it's no big deal.
I'm not sure what the ideal TV experience would be. I do like how the Apple TV is integrated with all the iDevices and Macs at home with iTunes and AirPlay but I'm sure there'll be more to it than that in the future. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Apple has in store. I don't think there's any doubt that Apple will get into it in a big way. We just don't know when. Apple isn't going to sit by idly while everyone else like Google, Samsung, Microsoft, LG, Sony, etc. continue to stake out a piece of the emerging digital (or "smart") TV market.
I don't think anyone even knows what they're really going after. They all seem to be flailing and throwing whatever they can at the wall and hope that something sticks and takes off. Apple will have to define what that something is. Even if Apple does, they won't catch everyone off guard like they did with the iPhone in the mobile phone market. It'll have to be a long and slow climb. I'm all for it and am ready for it. It'll be like the final piece of a puzzle in the home. But I'm in no hurry to complete it.
It's in the software. We haven't seen that yet, but there is ABSOLUTELY nothing a television can provide that a $99 box cannot.
You would be correct until you say $99. Dropping all legacy support you can meet that price point, but a TV needs more I/O than the current apple tv offers-- a tuner at a minimum, a DVR if you are trying to dominate.
I would say the opposite: there is no need for a $99 box if you the right television.
Also, the $99 box doesn't control power, input source selection, or volume for the television, leading to remote control hell.
(I really hope Apple buys Sonos rather than trying to compete.)
They are one of TWO TV companies with a awfully-designed TV IMO, aesthetically. Loewe and B&O. I hope if Apple indeed bought this company, they will change their design direction to be much more widely accepted look much like the likes of Panasonic and Toshiba 2012 models or Samsung (ek!) and LG 2011 models. At least maybe Sony HX 2009-10 models.
Loewe and B&O, even the unknown Chinese TV models/brands starting to look more prettier the last time I check.
Ah, the old; "I know things you don't know, but I can't tell you, so you have to trust that I actually know this stuff, even though I can't prove any of it.", gambit.
Love it!
You left out - "I can tell you, but I'd have to kill you!"
Well if th $99 box can't give me what I have with DirecTV I have no reason to buy it. TV is not that complicated. My DirecTV box is very easy to use. When I had Dish Networks it was the same (though they didn't have all the content DirecTV does). I'm not sure what Apple is going to perfect or what Jobs thought he cracked.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but the user interface is the one thing that I hate about satellite tv. I've got cable but use a TiVo box, just because I find the interface better looking and more elegant. Now understand, I don't thick TiVo is perfect, just incrementally better. I hate dealing with Time Warner Cable and would ditch them in a minute if TiVo was fully integrated into a dish receiver. On the other hand, you can have my cable modem when you pry my cold dead fingers off of it, so I can't cut the cable completely.
They are one of TWO TV companies with a awfully-designed TV IMO, aesthetically. Loewe and B&O. I hope if Apple indeed bought this company, they will change their design direction to be much more widely accepted look much like the likes of Panasonic and Toshiba 2012 models or Samsung (ek!) and LG 2011 models. At least maybe Sony HX 2009-10 models. Loewe and B&O, even the unknown Chinese TV models/brands starting to look more prettier the last time I check.
I disagree. Look as an example the Loewe Invisio -model. Almost completely made of glass! I don´t know if there is a commercial product available (yet). I would thin this is a perfect math! Just add the Apple logo.....
If such a deal would take off, it would certainly administer a significant blow to Samsung's TV business (more than a set-top aTV box, which would work WITH Samsung TVs).
I still do believe that Apple is just working with major TV suppliers to incorporate (or allow attachment in a recess ) of the appleTV, negociating strict compliance with e.g.,
remote controls, or with Apple's iOS remote control strategy (e.g., a smart iPad app, as for Loewe, a far cry from the horrible GUI found in the Samsung SmartTVs;
CEC, where the aTV controls all the inputs to the TV, including the attached devices (instead of vice versa).
The reason why we apparently haven't seen patent applications to this effect may be that Apple wants a head start. There may already be ways in which Apple can prevent straightforward copying/clongig, e.g., using their development ecosystem.
It's in the software. We haven't seen that yet, but there is ABSOLUTELY nothing a television can provide that a $99 box cannot.
No, an Apple TV set can't provide any more software than an Apple TV box.
But a tv set can provide hardware integration. Namely, a flat panel, a tuner, an audio amplifier, a center speaker, and wireless speaker home base for left, right, and rear channels.
A quick query in the German patent databases reveals that Loewe Opta AG indeed holds or has applied to some patents that you would consider as necessary for the kind of products Apple is likely to offer when entering the telly market. I'm not at all an expert in patent matters, though.
The stuff is all in German, you might find equivalent applications at the European Patent office in English.
DE102009059281B4 covers the communication between an "entertainment electronics device" and a "communication electronics device", so basically your telly and your iOS device. EED sends EPG data to the CED (apparently via an intermediary device), nicely wrapped in XML; CED with touch control allows you to navigate, browse the program, probably preview (hard to decipher that patent lingo) and control the EED by pushing the symbol for the show you want to see towards the telly (which somehow knows the CED's location).
DE102010038159A1 covers "displays with adjustable transparency" (as an "Offenlegungsschrift", document of disclosure, it's not a granted patent yet, though). The display is characterised by: transparent liquid crystals; organic diodes (OLEDs); polarizer to control intensity of light going through the transparent display; ability to control transparency for specific light waves lengths (allows adjustment to different environments); and some more stuff.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but the user interface is the one thing that I hate about satellite tv. I've got cable but use a TiVo box, just because I find the interface better looking and more elegant. Now understand, I don't thick TiVo is perfect, just incrementally better. I hate dealing with Time Warner Cable and would ditch them in a minute if TiVo was fully integrated into a dish receiver. On the other hand, you can have my cable modem when you pry my cold dead fingers off of it, so I can't cut the cable completely.
Well I wouldn't call DirecTV's UI elegant (though the last upgrade made it better), but I personally don't find it confusing. It's very easy for me to find what I want to watch. I can record things remotely via my iPhone. Their iPad app lets me warch TV anywhere in my house. I now have Nomad service where I can take something on my DVR and transfer it to my iPad to watch away from home. Apple would need all that (or something similar) to pry me away from DirecTV.
No, an Apple TV set can't provide any more software than an Apple TV box.
But a tv set can provide hardware integration. Namely, a flat panel, a tuner, an audio amplifier, a center speaker, and wireless speaker home base for left, right, and rear channels.
I'd love it if Apple came out with a product that neatly integrated all the home audio products people have. For sure if they were ever to come out with a see through TV. My TV is inside an entertainment center and right now no way would I show anyone the mess of cables and cords behind the TV. It's embarrassing. If Apple can clean all that up I'm in (as long as I can keep my DirecTV).
Comments
"SoundJam was purchased and turned into iTunes in a heartbeat"
Wasn't that a drumbeat?
The stock is not going to tank just because they releass a TV... Even if it doesnt work, the stock price is based on valuation of all Apple products, and its already pretty cheap right now.
Ah, the old; "I know things you don't know, but I can't tell you, so you have to trust that I actually know this stuff, even though I can't prove any of it.", gambit.
Love it!
You don't want old patents. You want new patents. If its older than about 15 years, and you don't already have products based upon it, then it's not very useful.
A normal premium is about 30%. If you epwant the company badly enough, and you want to take it out of contention, you offer enough so the board can't think they. Old get more elsewhere. This is what Google did when they bought Motorola. The premium was something like 85%.
Its near impossible for Apple to compete with cable on content because of vertical integration. Lots of channels are now own by cable companies. In canada its even worst, almost all of the stations and channels are own by Cable or DSL companies.
Btw where I live we have a la carte programming. We dont have to buy the tv packages. This trend may spread so dont give up hope on that.
This makes perfect sense. All the rumblings and actions being taken do point to Apple getting into the TV biz. It definitely does remind me of all the hoopla going on before the iPhone was finally released. That being said, I agree with those who say that the only real differentiator will be software and content related. Great industrial design will help and there'll be millions who would buy a dumb panel with the Apple logo slapped on it, but for the long-term viability of an Apple HDTV set, it'll be all about how the interface accesses an expanded iTunes content base integrated with iCloud.
I've felt the TV world has been broken for years. I finally got fed up and ditched the normal service after going through standard cable (Cox), satellite (DirecTV), and Verizon's FiOS TV. I just have the Apple TV now with a Netflix account but it's really not much more than an online rental service of which there are many. It's really not a "traditional" TV. But since I find the great majority of TV programming to be trash, I don't mind the limited capabilities. I've never been much of a TV watcher at all. The only thing I really miss is live sports but I'm not the sports fan that I used to be either so it's no big deal.
I'm not sure what the ideal TV experience would be. I do like how the Apple TV is integrated with all the iDevices and Macs at home with iTunes and AirPlay but I'm sure there'll be more to it than that in the future. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Apple has in store. I don't think there's any doubt that Apple will get into it in a big way. We just don't know when. Apple isn't going to sit by idly while everyone else like Google, Samsung, Microsoft, LG, Sony, etc. continue to stake out a piece of the emerging digital (or "smart") TV market.
I don't think anyone even knows what they're really going after. They all seem to be flailing and throwing whatever they can at the wall and hope that something sticks and takes off. Apple will have to define what that something is. Even if Apple does, they won't catch everyone off guard like they did with the iPhone in the mobile phone market. It'll have to be a long and slow climb. I'm all for it and am ready for it. It'll be like the final piece of a puzzle in the home. But I'm in no hurry to complete it.
You would be correct until you say $99. Dropping all legacy support you can meet that price point, but a TV needs more I/O than the current apple tv offers-- a tuner at a minimum, a DVR if you are trying to dominate.
I would say the opposite: there is no need for a $99 box if you the right television.
Also, the $99 box doesn't control power, input source selection, or volume for the television, leading to remote control hell.
(I really hope Apple buys Sonos rather than trying to compete.)
I hope if Apple indeed bought this company, they will change their design direction to be much more widely accepted look much like the likes of Panasonic and Toshiba 2012 models or Samsung (ek!) and LG 2011 models. At least maybe Sony HX 2009-10 models.
Loewe and B&O, even the unknown Chinese TV models/brands starting to look more prettier the last time I check.
Television screens on internet media players?
Internet media players in televisions?
Think convergence. What goes? What arrives?
Could long term technological licenses be involved?
You left out - "I can tell you, but I'd have to kill you!"
I'm not saying you're wrong, but the user interface is the one thing that I hate about satellite tv. I've got cable but use a TiVo box, just because I find the interface better looking and more elegant. Now understand, I don't thick TiVo is perfect, just incrementally better. I hate dealing with Time Warner Cable and would ditch them in a minute if TiVo was fully integrated into a dish receiver. On the other hand, you can have my cable modem when you pry my cold dead fingers off of it, so I can't cut the cable completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse
They are one of TWO TV companies with a awfully-designed TV IMO, aesthetically. Loewe and B&O. I hope if Apple indeed bought this company, they will change their design direction to be much more widely accepted look much like the likes of Panasonic and Toshiba 2012 models or Samsung (ek!) and LG 2011 models. At least maybe Sony HX 2009-10 models. Loewe and B&O, even the unknown Chinese TV models/brands starting to look more prettier the last time I check.
I disagree. Look as an example the Loewe Invisio -model. Almost completely made of glass! I don´t know if there is a commercial product available (yet). I would thin this is a perfect math! Just add the Apple logo.....
Ummm, not for Apple!
If such a deal would take off, it would certainly administer a significant blow to Samsung's TV business (more than a set-top aTV box, which would work WITH Samsung TVs).
I still do believe that Apple is just working with major TV suppliers to incorporate (or allow attachment in a recess ) of the appleTV, negociating strict compliance with e.g.,
remote controls, or with Apple's iOS remote control strategy (e.g., a smart iPad app, as for Loewe, a far cry from the horrible GUI found in the Samsung SmartTVs;
CEC, where the aTV controls all the inputs to the TV, including the attached devices (instead of vice versa).
The reason why we apparently haven't seen patent applications to this effect may be that Apple wants a head start. There may already be ways in which Apple can prevent straightforward copying/clongig, e.g., using their development ecosystem.
Ha ha, that would be a great slogan.
But a tv set can provide hardware integration. Namely, a flat panel, a tuner, an audio amplifier, a center speaker, and wireless speaker home base for left, right, and rear channels.
A quick query in the German patent databases reveals that Loewe Opta AG indeed holds or has applied to some patents that you would consider as necessary for the kind of products Apple is likely to offer when entering the telly market. I'm not at all an expert in patent matters, though.
The stuff is all in German, you might find equivalent applications at the European Patent office in English.
DE102009059281B4 covers the communication between an "entertainment electronics device" and a "communication electronics device", so basically your telly and your iOS device. EED sends EPG data to the CED (apparently via an intermediary device), nicely wrapped in XML; CED with touch control allows you to navigate, browse the program, probably preview (hard to decipher that patent lingo) and control the EED by pushing the symbol for the show you want to see towards the telly (which somehow knows the CED's location).
DE102010038159A1 covers "displays with adjustable transparency" (as an "Offenlegungsschrift", document of disclosure, it's not a granted patent yet, though). The display is characterised by: transparent liquid crystals; organic diodes (OLEDs); polarizer to control intensity of light going through the transparent display; ability to control transparency for specific light waves lengths (allows adjustment to different environments); and some more stuff.
EP000002249559A3 covers regular expressions for EPGs.
A three docs were published in 2012.