PDA

View Full Version : Apple Television Set to Include Motion Sensing Control and Touchscreen Remote?




MacRumors
Jun 11, 2012, 08:54 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/11/apple-television-set-to-include-motion-sensing-control-and-touchscreen-remote/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/03/apple_tv_2012_interface-150x92.jpgWhile Apple is not expected to reveal its long-rumored television set product that has been the subject of increasing rumors at today's Worldwide Developers Conference keynote, Topeka Capital Markets analyst Brian White has published a new research note addressing some of his expectations for the device based on a recent visit to Taiwan for the Computex trade show and to visit with supply chain companies in several markets.

White believes that the Apple television set will adopt several methods of interaction, most significantly including motion detection technology, perhaps similar to that found in Microsoft's Kinect offerings. He also suggests that the television will still include a remote control, which will arrive as an iPad-like touchscreen device.Regarding Apple TV, the data points during our trip indicate the Company will use a special type of motion detection technology on future full blown Apple TV that we expect to be unveiled within the next couple of quarters, rather than touch technology. Also, our contacts indicate a unique remote control with a touch panel form factor that looks similar to the iPad would be used to control the device. The bezel is expected to be a plastic composition, rather than the aluminum unibody exterior that surrounds the MacBook Air.White makes no mention of Siri voice control, but many observers expect that Apple will also make use of its voice recognition and natural language processing algorithms to make it easy for users to control their television viewing experiences.

Finally, the new report from White also outlines his continued belief that Apple is preparing to launch a smaller "iPad mini", with both that product and the next-generation iPhone reportedly lining up for a simultaneous launch in September of this year.

Article Link: Apple Television Set to Include Motion Sensing Control and Touchscreen Remote? (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/11/apple-television-set-to-include-motion-sensing-control-and-touchscreen-remote/)



emacna1
Jun 11, 2012, 08:55 AM
I think the current Apple TV remote is excellent. A touchscreen remote is not needed in my opinion.

twochoicestom
Jun 11, 2012, 08:56 AM
No. Fing. Way

jasonxneo
Jun 11, 2012, 08:56 AM
Sounds good! As long as they implement it correctly unlike the kinect where nothing gets recognized!! :mad:

applesith
Jun 11, 2012, 08:57 AM
Nothing to see here. March march

ganymedes13
Jun 11, 2012, 08:58 AM
And just when I was wondering where the crazy rumors would come from on the day of the keynote...

Peace
Jun 11, 2012, 08:58 AM
Touchscreen display as a remote I can see.

kcamfork
Jun 11, 2012, 08:58 AM
No thanks.

tigres
Jun 11, 2012, 08:59 AM
We already have touchscreen remotes that adapt to the current and future ecosystem.

They include:
iPhone
iTouch
iPad

mrmarts
Jun 11, 2012, 08:59 AM
The question is will it have 4k and be 3d glasses free if not I can pass

Cougarcat
Jun 11, 2012, 09:00 AM
For the love of god put analyst's ridiculous speculation on Page 2.

Analysts are NEVER right.

TC400
Jun 11, 2012, 09:00 AM
hmm i still think this is a hobby for apple.
they are not quite ready yet

jtrenthacker
Jun 11, 2012, 09:01 AM
I'm going to go with.....NO

estockme
Jun 11, 2012, 09:02 AM
What about all this requires an entire television? Why not build this stuff into a future apple tv + an app? Or is it more about brand cache to have the apple television set?

oiuh151
Jun 11, 2012, 09:02 AM
Wii U?

elvetio
Jun 11, 2012, 09:02 AM
this will be a 5 hours keynote....

radiogoober
Jun 11, 2012, 09:03 AM
An analyst has to be an idiot to write that Apple would make an iPad sized remote, instead of using the iPhone, iPad, etc.

SdeCarolis
Jun 11, 2012, 09:03 AM
In my opinion, White is out in the blue...

whooleytoo
Jun 11, 2012, 09:03 AM
I think the current Apple TV remote is excellent. A touchscreen remote is not needed in my opinion.

Different strokes for different folks I guess...

But I HATE the ATV remote. Too easy to accidentally click the select button while scrolling. And a 'digital' up/down button is a very poor way of scrolling through lots of content. A touchscreen remote would be far, far quicker and more accurate for selecting programmes from an EPG.

Hopefully, the TV sends the programme list to the remote, so you can keep the existing programme on-screen while scrolling through the EPG on the remote.

Rogifan
Jun 11, 2012, 09:03 AM
Is Brian White usually accurate with his predictions?

pinchez
Jun 11, 2012, 09:03 AM
The public at large (me included) will absolutely not pay the premium that Apple will charge for there TV's. The trend is is for large cheap screen that people can add there own PVR's, Consoles and media players to.

This is a stupid move by Apple and they should concentrate on developing the Apple TV in to a must have device with Apps.

Peace
Jun 11, 2012, 09:04 AM
An analyst has to be an idiot to write that Apple would make an iPad sized remote, instead of using the iPhone, iPad, etc.

He didn't say iPad sized. He said iPad like.
There is a difference.

Lordskelic
Jun 11, 2012, 09:04 AM
It's Apple. Of course it's going to be a touchscreen remote or some kind of "revolutionary way to interact with your television".

kalsta
Jun 11, 2012, 09:05 AM
He also suggests that the television will still include a remote control, which will arrive as an iPad-like touchscreen device.

My instant reaction: sounds a lot like an iPod touch.

We already have touchscreen remotes that adapt to the current and future ecosystem.

They include:
iPhone
iTouch
iPad

Remote is a great app. But as a dedicated remote, people expect it to work instantly… they don't expect to have to unlock the device, and wait for wi-fi connection to establish…

olowott
Jun 11, 2012, 09:06 AM
We already have touchscreen remotes that adapt to the current and future ecosystem.

They include:
iPhone
iTouch
iPad

Exaclty, why include another touchscreen device when we got the best, all we need is just an app like the remote app:cool:

maehara
Jun 11, 2012, 09:09 AM
I don't want to have to wave my arms like an idiot to control the TV. I also don't want to have to shout over the kids to do it (or have them able to hijack the TV themselves via voice control). Perhaps it's just me, but I don't understand why people think these methods of 'control' are an improvement for a TV.

iPhone / iPad app would do the job is just fine. Or a good old-fashioned remote, but with Bluetooth connectivity so I don't have to worry about line-of-sight.

dazzer21
Jun 11, 2012, 09:09 AM
I hope to God in all that's Apple that Samsung haven't stolen a march on this! I've just had a look at their website and the stuff on their Smart TV is indeed revolutionary compared to how a 'normal' TV works. I don't see how the new Apple item can be *as* excitingly different to the Samsung as the Samsung is as excitingly different to run-of-the-mill sets. I hope Steve had something like built-in time travel in mind... I really want it to be (a) inexplicably brilliant and (b) patented to hell!!!! :D

iScott428
Jun 11, 2012, 09:10 AM
This is what that so called 7" "iPad Mini" will be, a remote for the TV.

Navdakilla
Jun 11, 2012, 09:10 AM
not going to happen

JNSC
Jun 11, 2012, 09:12 AM
You know that touch-remote? It's called any given iOS device. :rolleyes:

It's like when everyone was claiming there would be a 3G iPod touch. That's called an iPhone, people.

Chupa Chupa
Jun 11, 2012, 09:13 AM
You don't really need a dedicated remote. An iPad app would do fine -- See DirecTV's app. I use it all the time b/c it works better than my flaky whole house IR repeater system.

twoodcc
Jun 11, 2012, 09:13 AM
only time will tell. i'm still not convinced apple needs to release a tv. just make the apple tv better, which in theory could make all tvs appletvs

Frosticus
Jun 11, 2012, 09:14 AM
I'm not so sure about this whole motion sensing remote control idea ( a la Kinect)... A combination of an adaptive remote (i.e. a touchscreen) - be it included with the TV or simply via the iPhone/iPad - and maybe voice control would be the way to go.
As impressive as it would be to control your TV by waving your hands around, from a practicality perspective, I don't think it would be that great. People with kids for example, would have a nightmare keeping it on the same channel!

Rogifan
Jun 11, 2012, 09:18 AM
What about all this requires an entire television? Why not build this stuff into a future apple tv + an app? Or is it more about brand cache to have the apple television set?
How much $$ does Apple make off the $99 box? Tim Cook already said they're not looking to make a lot of money on the content side because they make their money on devices.

kavika411
Jun 11, 2012, 09:18 AM
My sister's boyfriend, who works security at the Muscone Center, heard from his boss that the biggest announcement from Apple today will be the unveiling of a new six-foot HDMI cable that is superior to Monster cable but only slightly more expensive.

Sensation
Jun 11, 2012, 09:19 AM
So now Apple steal Kinect :(

whooleytoo
Jun 11, 2012, 09:20 AM
The public at large (me included) will absolutely not pay the premium that Apple will charge for there TV's. The trend is is for large cheap screen that people can add there own PVR's, Consoles and media players to.

This is a stupid move by Apple and they should concentrate on developing the Apple TV in to a must have device with Apps.

I don't know. I've said that in the past, but then after seeing the latest shiny new design I get hooked. Let's face it, if we were primarily interested in cheap devices and didn't care about design, chances are we wouldn't be Apple users.

Heard rumours of very thin flat-screens being seen in Apple (probably a given, since all modern TVs are quite thin), can't wait to see what they look like.

instantly… they don't expect to have to unlock the device, and wait for wi-fi connection to establish…

I wish they'd just get rid of the lock screens, for the iPad anyhow. Just tap the Home button, no need to swipe. The waiting for Wifi might be more of an issue, I guess for sending controls, they could use Bluetooth; but for receiving data from the TV (such as displaying the EPG) they could use Wifi once it has connected.

Big-TDI-Guy
Jun 11, 2012, 09:20 AM
Touchscreen only remote = YUCK! YUCK! YUCK!

Don't want to HAVE to stare at my remote for every single action, real buttons are a must. I do, however think a touch display has its place, but that would be alongside a few (common action) hard buttons.

I will miss the days of not having to recharge my remote all the time. Though via Bluetooth or wifi, a great little "where is my remote hiding now?" app could save me from cushion diving every other day!

Ciclismo
Jun 11, 2012, 09:21 AM
The question is will it have 4k and be 3d glasses free if not I can pass

Sure, because there's so much 4k content available right now.:rolleyes:

rawdawg
Jun 11, 2012, 09:22 AM
Is it agreed this television will probably be extremely expensive so I should go ahead and get a 60" now instead of waiting? (I'm basing that assumption off current monitor prices)

Glideslope
Jun 11, 2012, 09:22 AM
Touchscreen display as a remote I can see.

Welcome to the 7" iPad. :cool:

lzyprson
Jun 11, 2012, 09:22 AM
Sounds like an Apple television is going to be amazing.. What the heck are you all bitching for? You all read this blog daily, even list EVERY single apple product you own in your signature... LOL...

Just admit. If they build it, you will buy it. And thankfully it will be awesome because Apple made it. :apple:

******************
:apple:10 iPhones Yo - 32gb, 5 inch screen, 8gb, gen 1 2 & 3 & 4 and all the S's.
:apple:iMac 27inch and 21 inch - old school and new school
:apple:Oldschool Apple Quicktake son - still working
:apple:Various Protype Apple Products that I bought on Ebay for thousands of dollas
:apple:iWork runnin in my OS
:apple:iPhoto to organize all of iLifes memorable moments
:apple: OG See thru iMac - 2.21gwatts - Turned into a fishbowl
:apple:Aluminium wireless keyboard - 1st Gen - Aluminum
:apple:Get a life

crs.one
Jun 11, 2012, 09:22 AM
This is what that so called 7" "iPad Mini" will be, a remote for the TV.

My first thought (and hope).

I'm amazed that this guy didn't connect the dots.

andy845
Jun 11, 2012, 09:23 AM
I hope to God in all that's Apple that Samsung haven't stolen a march on this! I've just had a look at their website and the stuff on their Smart TV is indeed revolutionary compared to how a 'normal' TV works. I don't see how the new Apple item can be *as* excitingly different to the Samsung as the Samsung is as excitingly different to run-of-the-mill sets. I hope Steve had something like built-in time travel in mind... I really want it to be (a) inexplicably brilliant and (b) patented to hell!!!! :D

Yep, they need to have a lot more than that up their sleeve if they hope to compete with Samsung in the TV market.

http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/tv-audio-video/television/led-tv/

Frosticus
Jun 11, 2012, 09:24 AM
Sure, because there's so much 4k content available right now.:rolleyes:

I was thinking the exact same thing...! :rolleyes:

robgreene
Jun 11, 2012, 09:24 AM
Personally, the tv remote he describes sounds awfully similar to the iPad mini descriptions. "Including a free iPad mini with your tv purchase" would be a nifty move.

lzyprson
Jun 11, 2012, 09:25 AM
Touchscreen only remote = YUCK! YUCK! YUCK!

Don't want to HAVE to stare at my remote for every single action, real buttons are a must. I do, however think a touch display has its place, but that would be alongside a few (common action) hard buttons.

I will miss the days of not having to recharge my remote all the time. Though via Bluetooth or wifi, a great little "where is my remote hiding now?" app could save me from cushion diving every other day!

you're too old to understand and will never get it.

Frosticus
Jun 11, 2012, 09:25 AM
This is what that so called 7" "iPad Mini" will be, a remote for the TV.

Quite possibly.

derbladerunner
Jun 11, 2012, 09:25 AM
Wii U?

I thought the same thing. Except Apple's implementation will probably be multi-touch and feature no stylus.

I don't see the revolution, very similar to Wii U (and the forthcoming XBox SmartGlass).

Edsel
Jun 11, 2012, 09:26 AM
The new Apple TV will use a thought sensing technology. You'll soon know what is on your partner's mind.....

crs.one
Jun 11, 2012, 09:27 AM
Touchscreen only remote = YUCK! YUCK! YUCK!

Don't want to HAVE to stare at my remote for every single action, real buttons are a must. I do, however think a touch display has its place, but that would be alongside a few (common action) hard buttons.

I will miss the days of not having to recharge my remote all the time. Though via Bluetooth or wifi, a great little "where is my remote hiding now?" app could save me from cushion diving every other day!

I think the concept is you won't have to look at your remote at all. Worst case scenario, hold it up to your mouth to speak commands, provided Siri makes the necessary improvements.

Gasu E.
Jun 11, 2012, 09:27 AM
No thanks.

In my opinion, we don't need another mp3 player, especially some overpriced thing from Apple.

Oh, wait, it's not still 2001 is it?

crs.one
Jun 11, 2012, 09:28 AM
The new Apple TV will use a thought sensing technology. You'll soon know what is on your partner's mind.....

"honey, I don't know why it keeps changing to Cinemax..."

spcdust
Jun 11, 2012, 09:30 AM
People keep mentioning a 4K display......why would anyone want one at this moment in time? Pointless and expensive and won't happen for the foreseeable future as no mainstream media supports it.

Touchpad type remote.....I can see an argument for it however I hope they make it robust enough for all the times it get's knocked onto the floor, sat on and such like - I don't want to treat the TV remote with "kitten gloves"

With all these supposed high end innovations which sound extremely costly I'm not sure Apple could justify a premium price. I tend to agree that the majority of people are happier paying a cheaper price for a panel and connecting their own devices. The display industry keeps innovating at a fast pace (4K will eventually become mainstream) that do you really want to pay a premium price for an Apple TV which will rapidly get left behind in terms of features and display quality? Would Apple sell enough units to justify the R&D / production costs?

Finally, Analysts are full of bull, they have been touting an Apple TV for years and just make up stuff and regurgitate speculation they read on these forums as some sort of qualified fact. TBH I would not be surprised if this Apple TV never materialised, however if it does I'm thinking this may be the one that burns Apples fingers.

Schizoid
Jun 11, 2012, 09:30 AM
Samsung are out of the gates with the Smart TV I see... looks good too, anyone had a play yet?

mrklaw
Jun 11, 2012, 09:31 AM
they need buttons on this. Even more than for games (which really need them), you don't want a touchscreen only remote. For selecting a macro, or pressing a channel logo, touch is fine (or for selecting a movie to watch). But quickly changing the channel, muting or changing the volume, you want to be able to blindly feel for a button and press it without having to unlock it or look down at a screen. Or talk.

wkadamsjr
Jun 11, 2012, 09:33 AM
His comment on the smaller iPad totally discredited his statement. Smaller iPad is not going to happen.

kalsta
Jun 11, 2012, 09:34 AM
So now Apple steal Kinect :(

A telescreen with a camera that constantly monitors your every movement isn't a new idea. George Orwell thought of it in 1948.

Big-TDI-Guy
Jun 11, 2012, 09:35 AM
you're too old to understand and will never get it.

Ok then, how about explaining your point of view so that other children may understand. And I, though old and stupid, shall make my best attempt to also comprehend your superior intellectual insight.

jman240
Jun 11, 2012, 09:36 AM
I'll believe it when I see it..


see what I did there?

notabadname
Jun 11, 2012, 09:38 AM
I so -don't care- about an Apple TV. I am going to buy a TV based on picture quality, and not gimmicks like speaking to it or waving at it. Most of us leave a TV on an HDMI input and use the cable box or satellite box to control the source/channel that we watch. And many of us need a universal remote to control those boxes, the blu-ray and maybe receiver/stereo. I don't see this ever succeeding anymore than the AppleTV box currently does, which has pretty weak market penetration.

Battlefield Fan
Jun 11, 2012, 09:39 AM
As soon as I read analyst I stopped reading.

pinchez
Jun 11, 2012, 09:39 AM
Samsung could well be the next Apple!

Look at the Gallaxy 3 phone it absolutely blows the iPhone out the water and I love my iPhone but never have I been more tempted to switch!

Thing is it's not just about the tech, Samsung will do it well and importantly do it cheaper...

2bikes
Jun 11, 2012, 09:41 AM
I`m sure it will be TVolutionary

kalsta
Jun 11, 2012, 09:42 AM
Yep, they need to have a lot more than that up their sleeve if they hope to compete with Samsung in the TV market.

You're right. In fact, Samsung are so confident in the superiority of their technology, they really do believe the TVs will sell themselves. But just in case they don't, they promise you a 'behind-the-scenes' look at Angela Bellotte leaving little to the imagination… and all you need to do is 'like' Samsung's smart TV page on Facebook. :rolleyes:

lzyprson
Jun 11, 2012, 09:43 AM
Ok then, how about explaining your point of view so that other children may understand. And I, though old and stupid, shall make my best attempt to also comprehend your superior intellectual insight.

Did you throw a hissy fit in 2007 when you had to give up your CrackBerry for a touchscreen iPhone? I'm sure you at least bitched about it on Macrumors.com...

Dont knock it till you tried it.

charlituna
Jun 11, 2012, 09:48 AM
I think the current Apple TV remote is excellent. A touchscreen remote is not needed in my opinion.

Try doing any kind of password entry on it and you might disagree.

That said I don't see them making a touchpad just for this. Update the remote app. Perhaps this alleged remote is an update of the iPod touch to a slightly larger screen, I could buy that as a possibility

----------

Is Brian White usually accurate with his predictions?

Last April he said this tv would be out by the end of the year. As in 2011.

drober30
Jun 11, 2012, 09:48 AM
The new remote must have the ability to control my other devices hopefully with out line of site. Maybe a wifi adapter with flashers.

dashiel
Jun 11, 2012, 09:49 AM
The public at large (me included) will absolutely not pay the premium that Apple will charge for there TV's. The trend is is for large cheap screen that people can add there own PVR's, Consoles and media players to.

The public at large will not pay the premium Apple will charge for their* small capacity MP3 player. People want large storage for cheap.

The public at large will not pay ˘99 a song when they can get it free from Napster for free.

The public at large will not pay $500 for a phone when they can get one for $199.

The public at large will not pay $500 for a glorified iPod touch

There’s a reason Apple has $100 billion in the bank, dominates profit and market share in MP3 players, music stores, smart phones and tablets and you and I make stupid comments on the internet.


* There – in, at or to that place or position
Their - belonging to or associated with the people or things previously mentioned

ru2b12
Jun 11, 2012, 09:51 AM
Similar to the eyetv software...
I think a multiplex mode for OTA channels would be nice. :)

andy845
Jun 11, 2012, 09:57 AM
You're right. In fact, Samsung are so confident in the superiority of their technology, they really do believe the TVs will sell themselves. But just in case they don't, they promise you a 'behind-the-scenes' look at Angela Bellotte leaving little to the imagination… and all you need to do is 'like' Samsung's smart TV page on Facebook. :rolleyes:

Personally i think the advert is quite entertaining and fun! For those who haven't seen this you can watch it here.

http://www.moreaboutadvertising.com/2012/05/angela-bellottes-seductive-motion-scores-for-samsung-and-betc-london/

Boghog
Jun 11, 2012, 09:59 AM
Here's why the remote can't be an iPhone, iPod or iPad, why it can't have any other functionality other than communicating with the TV: if it does, it will never be there when you need it. You don't want a remote that your kids will be tempted to take next door to update their Facebook status or play games on.
So a dedicated device sounds about right.

I still don't buy the :apple:TV-set rumors. It's a market that has almost no margins in the low price range and that they can't bring anything to in the higher price range that they couldn't do just as well with their little box. Actually all of the ideas floating around could be realized if the new miraculous device WAS just the remote with the addition of a little receiver to plug into any old TV you happen to own. What :apple:TV really needs, in my opinion, is a port to plug in a live TV signal. But this is me. I still think the iPad needs a stylus.

MythicFrost
Jun 11, 2012, 10:02 AM
When Steve Jobs wrote in his Biography that "I've finally cracked it!" I can't imagine him meaning this:

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/3210/1289385686familyplaying.gif

What would truly be revolutionary is a voice navigated TV, one that works well. You'd only need a tiny remote with a mic, and that's what I think is coming.

sclawis300
Jun 11, 2012, 10:04 AM
You don't really need a dedicated remote. An iPad app would do fine -- See DirecTV's app. I use it all the time b/c it works better than my flaky whole house IR repeater system.

Does it work better than Uverse's app? They continually update it and break it. When it does work it is awesome, that just seems to never happen these days.

pugnaciousp
Jun 11, 2012, 10:07 AM
I love my current Apple TV. When I'm sitting in my living room with friends and want to show everyone this video on YouTube, I can just pull it up on my iPhone and send it to the big screen... effortlessly. Recently, I discovered Stream2Me and now I can pull up a movie (in any format really) on my iPhone/iPad and just send that straight to the big screen.

I wish Apple would keep with the same idea of an aTV being an extension of your Apple devices to your home theater. I'm not looking for a new television set, and tapping into that well developed market seems unnecessarily risky.

sclawis300
Jun 11, 2012, 10:18 AM
you're too old to understand and will never get it.

you couldn't be any more wrong. Also, when I am laying in bed I don't like my ipad shining in my face to change the channel.

----------

The public at large will not pay the premium Apple will charge for their* small capacity MP3 player. People want large storage for cheap.


The public at large will not pay $500 for a phone when they can get one for $199.

The public at large will not pay $500 for a glorified iPod touch


Who actually pays $500 for their phone? I seriously doubt that it is the "public at large".

I am having trouble seeing how the iPad is a glorified iPod touch.

Mr Rogers
Jun 11, 2012, 10:37 AM
Think KINECT and LEAP MOTION chaps - this is the way forward and Apple already build face recognition devices into laptops, tablets and iMac - it really is the way to go.

hortod1
Jun 11, 2012, 10:46 AM
Weren't there rumors a month or two ago about a smaller iPad in the works? Perhaps it's not an iPad after all, but a remote for this thing...

lzyprson
Jun 11, 2012, 10:50 AM
They're not going to make a smaller iPad just to compete with a Kindle Fire. The numbers indicate that Apple has very little competition in the tablet space. They never made an iPhone nano did they? No - 3rd and 4th generation iPhones are essentially the nano's people have been looking for (lower price points).

News of a smaller iPad is the biggest indiciation that an Apple Television set will come with an iPod/iPad-like remote control.

spcdust
Jun 11, 2012, 10:50 AM
I think the more interesting speculation is that Apple are finally opening up the current Apple TV to third party developers. Wether this is some sort of precursor to a fully fledged Apple TV panel is irrelevant to me as I'm more than happy with my Panasonic TV and will be for the foreseeable future.

Pakaku
Jun 11, 2012, 11:03 AM
We already have touchscreen remotes that adapt to the current and future ecosystem.

They include:
iPhone
iTouch
iPad

Well, until Apple decides not to support my iPhone anymore...

kalsta
Jun 11, 2012, 11:40 AM
Personally i think the advert is quite entertaining and fun!

Of course, it has a certain appeal to it. ;) But seriously, their Facebook page says, 'Like this page to see behind-the-scenes footage of Seductive Motion …' These days they call that viral marketing. It used to be called bribery.

When Steve Jobs wrote in his Biography that "I've finally cracked it!" I can't imagine him meaning this:

Image (http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/3210/1289385686familyplaying.gif)

Ha, ha… I think that might be the family-friendly version of the Samsung ad!!

theanchovie
Jun 11, 2012, 08:52 PM
An analyst has to be an idiot to write that Apple would make an iPad sized remote, instead of using the iPhone, iPad, etc.


Okay think about it. Not everyone has a iphone, ipad, etc. So apple sells and expensive TV and requires you to buy another $300.00 + device. That makes no sense. They would be eliminating a lot of buyers right out of the gate. I think you owe the analyst an apology. lol

radiogoober
Jun 11, 2012, 09:23 PM
Okay think about it. Not everyone has a iphone, ipad, etc. So apple sells and expensive TV and requires you to buy another $300.00 + device. That makes no sense. They would be eliminating a lot of buyers right out of the gate. I think you owe the analyst an apology. lol

The number of people who would buy an apple tv without owning an iPhone or iPod or iPad is zero. Sounds like you have the intelligence of that analyst.