PDA

View Full Version : Munster: An Apple TV Set by 2011




NJMetsHero
Aug 20, 2009, 02:24 PM
Gene Munster has seen the future of television and it has an Apple (AAPL) logo on it.

In a note to clients Thursday, Piper Jaffray's senior analyst offered a scenario by which Apple would enter the cut-throat TV market by 2011 with an Apple-branded television set with digital video recording and home media functions (music, movies, games, interactive TV) built-in.

"Yes, TV hardware is a challenging business if you don't change the rules of the game," Munster writes, "but we see potential for Apple to offer best-in-class software and hardware and charge a premium."

The roadmap to Apple television (as opposed to Apple TV), as Munster sees it:


A new Apple TV set-top box within the next few months, with a TV imput and DVR built in. "With the popularity of ad-based internet TV (Hulu.com) and subscription models (Netflix's Watch Instantly), we believe a-la-carte (iTunes) video purchases have lost share against other video models in recent months. As such, we believe Apple is exploring a subscription-based offering for its TV content in iTunes."
An iTunes TV Pass within the next year. "Apple could leverage its deep library of content with many network and cable channel content owners to provide unlimited access to a sub-library of its TV shows for a standard monthly fee ($30 to $40 per month). Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill (~$85/month) and offer access to current and older episodes of select shows on select channels."
An Apple television set within the next two years that could wirelessly sync with iPods, iPhones and Macs. "Such a device would command a premium among a competitive field of budget TVs; we believe Apple could differentiate itself with software that makes home entertainment simple and solves a pain point for consumers (complicated TV and component systems)."
As evidence for Apple's interest for pushing deeper into the living room, Munster cites: COO Tim Cook's statement last month that the company will continue to invest in Apple TV because "we fundamentally believe there is something there for us in the future"; patents covering digital video recording; and a five-year, $500 million partnership with LG to produce LCD screens.

Munster notes that Apple currently controls an addressable user base of more than 65 million iTunes users and has sold more than 48 million iPhones and iPod touches that could be used as TV remotes or interactive TV game controllers.

"The argument that Apple will not enter the television market because prices have declined by ~70% in the past three years," he concludes, "is a similar argument used to conclude Apple would not enter the cell phone market, given phones had seen similar price declines. The bottom line, 10 million HDTV's sold in the US a year is a real market, and if history repeats itself, Apple will find away to compete in a commoditized market with a premium priced product."

Munster expects Apple to sell 6.6 million Apple TVs in calendar 2009, up from an estimated 2.1 million in 2008 — an estimate of 3X growth that he believes may be conservative. By his calculation, every addition 1 million units Apple sells adds $.03 to Apple's EPS.

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/08/20/munster-an-apple-television-set-by-2011/

I didn't know where else to post this and it was very intriguing. I've always thought Apple would eventually get into this business. Depending on the price, this would definitely be something I would be interested in.



Peace
Aug 20, 2009, 02:27 PM
"Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill"

Don't think for a minute the cable companies like that idea one bit.

Shiner
Aug 20, 2009, 02:33 PM
Why oh why do we have to read posts from this moron!! He makes stuff up and has no inside information. Apple will never enter that market.

blondepianist
Aug 20, 2009, 02:34 PM
Intriguing, but we all know how accurate analysts are...

NJMetsHero
Aug 20, 2009, 02:35 PM
"Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill"

Don't think for a minute the cable companies like that idea one bit.

To completely replace cable and satellite TV, Apple would need to work out a deal with the major sports leagues to stream games for a reasonable price. Until that happens, I still need cable. I would get blacked out from my favorite teams in I didn't watch them where they are now.

SeattleMoose
Aug 20, 2009, 02:39 PM
I have worked with Apple/Mac products since 1989 and love Apple and the Mac.

However, there has been a marked decline in the quality of their products in the last 6 or 7 years. I attribute this to Apple's explosion of new products/markets and the dilution of their core design team as the best and brightest are pulled into new organizations and Apples hires more and more engineers from other SW companies (e.g. MS) who bring their PC ideals of quality with them.

I predict that as Apple continues to expand that Apple Quality Control will converge down to be no better than MS Quallity Control. Hope not, but it appears headed in that direction.

I hope they don't ultimately become a victim of their own success.

mattwolfmatt
Aug 20, 2009, 02:39 PM
So let me get this straight: this guy says that Apple MIGHT do this? This isn't even a rumor!

This just in: Apple MIGHT enter the automobile business. Can you imagine getting into an accident with the unibody Aluminum iCar? One fender bender at 4MPH and it's totaled. The whole thing would need to be replaced.

DUSTmurph
Aug 20, 2009, 02:42 PM
i wouldnt hold your breath.

basesloaded190
Aug 20, 2009, 02:42 PM
so because he saw a couple of ideas from a patent of apples and a short quote he jumped to the conclusion that its going to happen? this is just stupid

Tilpots
Aug 20, 2009, 02:42 PM
iTunes subscription = highly likely

iTunes should be competing for the dollars people spend on their cable bill. They'd be doing a lot better in this department if they made a set top box that wasn't crippled and featureless.

Apple Television = not for a loooooong time, if ever.

The people who would buy this TV already have an HD set. Most TV's last decades, unlike cellphones which last 2-3 years on average. I'd rather see them make an AV receiver before they made a TV set... They can't even get the AppleTV right yet.

Let's work on what you have, Apple before you start branching out too far from what you know...

Steve Jobs=God
Aug 20, 2009, 02:42 PM
So let me get this straight: this guy says that Apple MIGHT do this? This isn't even a rumor!

This just in: Apple MIGHT enter the automobile business. Can you imagine getting into an accident with the unibody Aluminum iCar? One fender bender at 4MPH and it's totaled. The whole thing would need to be replaced.


iirc there was once a rumor apple was designing a 'iCar'

Someone should just go up to Munster and slap him across the face with a MBA

zombiedictator
Aug 20, 2009, 02:43 PM
This would be pretty terrible. The cost per show of cable/satellite vs iTunes almost makes cable/satellite look cheap. Unless you can download an episode for 5 cents and watch it live I don't see anyone having any interest in this.

KingYaba
Aug 20, 2009, 02:45 PM
Subscription iTunes or bust.

notjustjay
Aug 20, 2009, 02:49 PM
My problem with all this stuff is the copyright/licensing clearance nonsense.

We in Canada had to wait years before we got the iTunes store, and even then, the music we have access to is not the same as what you get in the USA, or in the UK, Germany, etc.

We only just recently got movies, and movie rentals, and TV shows. While you in the US could virtually live on the TV shows available in iTunes, we in Canada smile and nod and say "gee, that's nice", and go back to our cable TV because there simply isn't enough good content yet.

You all talk about Amazon mp3 as a worthy competitor to iTunes. Not so much in Canada, where the service is not available. Nor is Hulu.

So a product tied to an "iTunes plan" might sound appealing to you folks in the US, but there's no way that would take off outside the USA unless Apple was to start working very, very hard on opening up the rights to a lot more content than there is currently available. In other words, it ain't gonna happen.

Not that I want to keep paying monthly fees for my Apple devices. MobileMe, this rumored cloud-based iWork, the iPhone, the rumored iTablet with its carrier tie-in, and now a TV plan? Methinks Apple is getting greedy. Of course, if any company can pull it off and make me want to spend the money, it's Apple...

KindredMAC
Aug 20, 2009, 02:49 PM
THIS JUST IN:

Gene Munster has seen the future of kitchen appliances and it has an Apple (AAPL) logo on it.

In a note to clients Thursday, Piper Jaffray's senior analyst offered a scenario by which Apple would enter the "cut-throat" kitchen appliance market by 2011 with an Apple-branded blender with digital video recording and home media functions (music, movies, games, interactive TV) built-in.

"Yes, kitchen appliances is indeed a challenging business if you don't change the rules of the game," Munster writes, "but we see potential for Apple to offer best-in-class smoothy-making and ice chipping and charge a premium."

Bevz
Aug 20, 2009, 02:50 PM
Well if they put apple tv software on it, it'll be crap....
Instead of all this silly talk about tellys (which I don't believe for a second) why don't apple just pull their finger out their arses and sort out the dreadful software on apple tv first! I don't say that lightly either, I love my appletv but apple need to give it some TLC by assigning some half decent coders to the project to sort it out. Essentially they need to stop thinking of it as "a hobby" and start taking their own product seriously.... Please!!

huck500
Aug 20, 2009, 02:52 PM
Apple will never enter that market.

http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/articlepics/mactv/image2.jpg

They won't? (http://lowendmac.com/500/macintosh-tv.html);)

talkingfuture
Aug 20, 2009, 02:58 PM
I think that IF we see an Apple TV it will be much sooner than 2011.

NightStorm
Aug 20, 2009, 02:58 PM
I wouldn't mind a combo AppleTV/26"-32" LCD TV for my bedroom...

I don't really think it's going to happen though.

Xenious
Aug 20, 2009, 02:58 PM
Just add the features to the Apple TV and we're already there.

jlanganki
Aug 20, 2009, 03:01 PM
This guy has zero understanding of Apple. TVs are a commodity, they're interchangeable. Apple doesn't sell commodities. I do think they'll add more features to Apple TV over time, but they would never go beyond that and sell an actual TV. That's just a dumb idea.

iMJustAGuy
Aug 20, 2009, 03:01 PM
Ive Been Saying This For The Past Two Years!:d

doug in albq
Aug 20, 2009, 03:01 PM
once again, I said it before them...!

http://dougitdesign.com/blogs/blog_1_12_09_Is-Apple-about-to-put-the-television-into-Apple-TV.html

KindredMAC
Aug 20, 2009, 03:01 PM
Come one everyone! Join in the fun!
You too can be like an analyst for a high power trading firm as long as you know how to Mad Libs®

Give it a try:

THIS JUST IN:

Gene Munster has seen the future of (insert industry genre) and it has an Apple (AAPL) logo on it.

In a note to clients Thursday, Piper Jaffray's senior analyst offered a scenario by which Apple would enter the "cut-throat" (insert same industry genre) by 2011 with an Apple-branded (insert product type) with digital video recording and home media functions (music, movies, games, interactive TV) built-in.

"Yes, (insert same industry genre) is indeed a challenging business if you don't change the rules of the game," Munster writes, "but we see potential for Apple to offer best-in-class (insert adjective) and (insert additional adjective) and charge a premium."

boss.king
Aug 20, 2009, 03:02 PM
Can someone slap this dude upside the head please? With a sword...

QCassidy352
Aug 20, 2009, 03:03 PM
I don't see them going the dvr route. Doesn't really mesh with the itunes store.

mrr
Aug 20, 2009, 03:03 PM
History shows that these wall street analysts are wrong on Apple stuff over and over again, but still it makes for fun reading.

AppleTV so far has only limited use and is not worth the bother.

AppleTV with TiVo would be ABOUT TIME!

The ability to archive to DVD and/or STREAM to my iPhone would be PRICELESS!

thinkadrian
Aug 20, 2009, 03:04 PM
i hate analysts...

besides, their job is not to find facts, just have philosophical moments. worthless.

jlanganki
Aug 20, 2009, 03:04 PM
I wouldn't mind if Apple TV added Netflix streaming and Hulu.com support. It won't happen though because they're competitors. Therefore, I hope the Roku player adds Hulu.com support, then it would be complete.

kamiboy
Aug 20, 2009, 03:04 PM
OLED or get out!

wackymacky
Aug 20, 2009, 03:06 PM
I do find it hard to beleive apple would do this.

Still,

It could explain thier new server farm.
Could explan why there is beenno recent :apple:TV updates.

A TV with :apple: TV built in, that i can also record broadcast TV as well as downloaded movies on would be good.

Knowing Apple the price point would be >$5000 USD.

andrew0122
Aug 20, 2009, 03:06 PM
I really don't see this happening. I think that they have learned with the :apple:TV "Hobby" they created that the TV industry is not a market they want to enter. I could see them partnering with a TV manufacturer to create software integration with a media server. I could be wrong though. I know if they did I'd probably end up buying it. I would defiantly want iPhone integration like with the apple TV.e

EagerDragon
Aug 20, 2009, 03:08 PM
A set top box, overgrown of Apple TV with DVR I think maybe in the cards,
an Actual Apple TV set, I do not believe it. Most people buy reasonable TV features at the lowest price possible, penetration IMHO would be poor.

Also I seem to remember that Sony or some other brand tv had a deal like that with Netflicks and someone else.

I can see Apple getting into transmitting local TV channels and ala-cart premioum channels to a set top box, a lot of people are not currently happy paying for 350 channels and only watching 10 to 20 of them becuase the others are fluff to them due to different likes and dislikes by subscribers.

To me for example, all the sports channels, religious channels, MTV, music channels, and a bunch more all they do is waste my time having to click past them when getting to the channels I watch. Others would exclude completly differently but the same principle, too many channels that people do not want to watch becuase cable, SAT and others will not give us ala-carte programming.

Obviously you may disagree.

bilbo--baggins
Aug 20, 2009, 03:09 PM
If it had a pixel for every time I've reset my Apple TV it would be mega-high-super-high definition...

Maybe they need to get the Apple TV working properly before thinking about anything else.

peterdevries
Aug 20, 2009, 03:11 PM
With this kind of poor speculation he is hurting his own business. I for one have seen enough of his inaccurate "predictions" to take him seriously.

I won't rule out that Apple will enter the TV business, but to deduce that from this circumstantial evidence is just ridiculous.

killerrobot
Aug 20, 2009, 03:11 PM
I don't see Apple entering this market, but I feel that's where televisions are heading (a no brainer).
I can't even imagine what the sticker price for the Apple Television would be, seeing that the 30" display alone costs $1799. :eek:

andrew0122
Aug 20, 2009, 03:12 PM
I wouldn't mind if Apple TV added Netflix streaming and Hulu.com support. It won't happen though because they're competitors. Therefore, I hope the Roku player adds Hulu.com support, then it would be complete.

The Apple TV DID have Hulu support up until a few months ago with an incredibly easy hack called Boxee (http://gizmodo.com/5159983/reminder-if-you-love-your-boxee-turn-off-automatic-apple-tv-updates)

dwman
Aug 20, 2009, 03:14 PM
This guy is the troll of Apple analysts. He's just trying to keep his name in the news so he can hope to one day get "Jim Goldman" type access to Apple execs. Tool!!

peterdevries
Aug 20, 2009, 03:16 PM
Knowing Apple the price point would be >$5000 USD.

With respect, but this "Apple is overpriced" stuff is getting old. :rolleyes:

We know it's not cheap, but we buy it anyway, so what's the problem?

dubhe
Aug 20, 2009, 03:16 PM
I have been waiting for a new :apple:tv for a long long time. Come on apple!

slimpunk
Aug 20, 2009, 03:18 PM
Here's my predictions for what an Apple TV set would be like:

- Glossy screen comes standard, and it cost $50 extra to get the anti-glare option

- No Blu-Ray support

- All devices have to be hooked up using the Apple MiniDisplay port, so you have to buy a bunch of adapters

- They'll be several models, from the MacScreen, to the MacScreen Pro

:rolleyes:

BornAgainMac
Aug 20, 2009, 03:18 PM
Steve Jobs must have been watching more TV than normal lately. He probably saw things he wanted to improve with an Apple product.

nagromme
Aug 20, 2009, 03:19 PM
I suppose there's no harm in Apple offering the option just to see how it goes, but it doesn't make sense to me. Everyone already has a TV, and when they buy their next one they have many options. They don't object to hooking other devices to their TV (everyone does it) so a separate AppleTV box remains the best option.

Seeing Apple TV advance would be nice, though. And I do like using my Mac as my DVR!

Blue Fox
Aug 20, 2009, 03:19 PM
I see this as something that could end up being HUGE for Apple. I've always said they should get into television and high-end home theater equipment. They completely changed the music industry with iPod/iTunes. They completely changed the mobile phone industry with iPhone/App Store. I can see them completely changing the home theater industry with their televisions and whatever else they have in mind.

And why not? Just about everything they put effort into innovates an entire industry, why not home theater? (after that, maybe car audio/video perhaps?)

brasscat
Aug 20, 2009, 03:19 PM
This is a rumor site after all, I understand that. But everything that's pure speculation is also reported here. Anything anyone thinks Apple might come up with. It gets to the point where it's not really information anyone can use.

I'd like to report that Apple COULD be a game changer in the hot air balloon market. Maybe 2012. iBalloon, a totally green transportation technology.

SirOmega
Aug 20, 2009, 03:20 PM
The idea of an Apple branded DVR is possible, but I would say thats about as far as it would go (replace the cable company? fat ****ing chance).

The opportunity for an Apple DVR exists because of OCAP or now known as Tru2Way. Apple could build their own STB like TiVo has done, but integrate iTunes to allow people to buy shows and movies, as well as stream music and movies from iTunes around the house.

There are substantial issues however, one is engineering and support - TiVo is slow as molasses when it comes to engineering new hardware (the new DirecTV TiVo just got delayed again). For Apple, you'd probably have to re-engineer the AppleTV to use an ARM chip and a broadcom video decoder (which, IMO, they need to do anyways to cut AppleTV costs down so they can sell it at $149), but from there you're really only adding the cable tuner and hardware to communicate with the headend, and the Java software to run the OCAP platform.

The issue of replacing the cable company wont work because they will not let themselves turn into a dumb pipe while all your video comes in over the internet. They'll institute monthly transmission caps (250GB/mo or whatever), they'll make sure that their providers (Discovery, Viacom, Disney/ABC, Universal, etc) don't put shows on iTunes until the day after they air. So while everyone else it talking about last nights episode of Survivor: Mars, you haven't been able to watch it yet because it just came out on iTunes a few hours ago. There are a number of things they can do to keep iTunes from getting a leg up.

DELLsFan
Aug 20, 2009, 03:21 PM
"Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill"

Don't think for a minute the cable companies like that idea one bit.

I couldn't give a rats tail what the cable companies think. I pay way too much for cable service. THEY are the ones that have enjoyed regional monopolies in towns throughout the years. THEY are the ones who have resisted consumer attempts to order channels a la carte - instead; forcing their packages on customers. THEY are the ones who fought tooth and nail to prevent the cable cards and integration of services like TIVO - instead; forcing their crappy DVR bricks onto customers. THEY are the ones charging extra for multiple cable boxes and remotes per account. THEY are the ones who haven't figured out what DRM has done to the Record Labels.

I say - let the cable companies die a painful bankruptcy and bring on my new and improved Apple TV service. :D

bbydon
Aug 20, 2009, 03:22 PM
there is no need for a dvr if you can stream it on demand any time you want.

cg0def
Aug 20, 2009, 03:24 PM
this is a very uneducated guess and a terrible idea ... #1 Jobs will never allow this to happen, #2 Apple has almost nothing to gain from an already overcrowded market.

Speedy2
Aug 20, 2009, 03:29 PM
No way!

benpatient
Aug 20, 2009, 03:30 PM
If apple goes down this road, it will bankrupt them.

No way this will happen.

They can't compete in this market.

They don't even want to. TVs are a race to the bottom, no matter what features they have, because flat-screen tech is so fast-moving and so relatively immature.

Not a chance.

dernhelm
Aug 20, 2009, 03:31 PM
I wouldn't mind if Apple TV added Netflix streaming and Hulu.com support. It won't happen though because they're competitors. Therefore, I hope the Roku player adds Hulu.com support, then it would be complete.

Roku player should add iTunes and Hulu support. THEN it would be complete.

BTW - I LOVE my Roku.

SirOmega
Aug 20, 2009, 03:31 PM
I couldn't give a rats tail what the cable companies think. I pay way too much for cable service. THEY are the ones that have enjoyed regional monopolies in towns throughout the years. THEY are the ones who have resisted consumer attempts to order channels a la carte - instead; forcing their packages on customers. THEY are the ones who fought tooth and nail to prevent the cable cards and integration of services like TIVO - instead; forcing their crappy DVR bricks onto customers. THEY are the ones charging extra for multiple cable boxes and remotes per account. THEY are the ones who haven't figured out what DRM has done to the Record Labels.

I say - let the cable companies die a painful bankruptcy and bring on my new and improved Apple TV service. :D

You pay too much for cable service because they keep adding channels, but as they add channels, I can still only watch 1 thing at a time.

I agree that they've fought against CableCard/OCAP, but I think they're beginning to realize whats happening. They're starting to come around.

A la carte will never happen because while the cable company would charge you per channel, do you think the content providers will all of a sudden accept less money? What gives you the idea that they would be OK with materially changing their agreements with cable and satellite companies to accept less money? They'll come in and say that the cable company will hand over $3 per subscriber for ESPN whether they subscribe to it in a la carte or not. Does your cable company have the guts to ditch all the ESPN sports channels? The Disney Channel? No they don't. A la carte will not save anyone any money.

Remember, its not just cable companies that you should be mad at. Be mad at Cisco/Scientific Atlanta or Motorola for charging per-unit fees that the Cable co passes on to you, be mad at Viacom, ESPN/Disney/ABC for the huge annual price hikes they force on customers.

mr.steevo
Aug 20, 2009, 03:31 PM
Can you imagine getting into an accident with the unibody Aluminum iCar? One fender bender at 4MPH and it's totaled. The whole thing would need to be replaced.

This isn't a concern.

Don't you know that Macs never crash?

s.

dernhelm
Aug 20, 2009, 03:34 PM
This isn't a concern.

Don't you know that Macs never crash?

s.

Oooh - that was good! :cool:

Cleverboy
Aug 20, 2009, 03:34 PM
This guy has zero understanding of Apple. TVs are a commodity, they're interchangeable. Apple doesn't sell commodities. I do think they'll add more features to Apple TV over time, but they would never go beyond that and sell an actual TV. That's just a dumb idea. You may have ZERO understanding of what a commodity is OR what Apple may or may not do.

Tvs, stereos, mp3 players.... even toasters and clock radios... these are NOT commodities. Commodities are things for which there is little possibility of differentiation across producers, and for which the market has determine a standard price based on demand.

Especially with electronics, there are wild differences amongst producers/manufacturers, and huge price differences in relation to any number of factors. In the electronics field, "transistors" or "Flash ram" are commodities, not he gadgets themselves.

No, Apple will likely produce a TV at some point, but like their Bluetooth headset and HiFi stereo system, they may or may not choose to continue the uncharacteristic offering (in a crowded field), if its not in their best interest to do so. While mp3 players may be ubiquitous, Apple continues to perform as the market leader, regardless of the feature parity achieved (or not) by their competitors.

Don't believe the hype that sticking an Apple logo on something will be all it needs to command legions of people to buy it in droves. If Apple thought that, they'd be out of business (evidenced by the amount of time and effort they'd invested in their products). Apple needs to move quickly to sunset any offerings it makes now or in the future, that do not appear to hold its own in the marketplace.

~ CB

ErikMadsen
Aug 20, 2009, 03:34 PM
I seriously doubt Apple would actually produce a set, as in a LCD, plasma or other forms. However, I do think they will unleash a major upgrade to the Apple TV product. Here's my expectations and wishlist...

Inputs
--------------------
CableCard slot
Coaxial In
HDMI (BluRay input, etc. - as I doubt they will ever produce a BluRay player)
Gigabit Ethernet
USB

Outputs
--------------------
HDMI
Component Video Out
Digital Audio Out

In The Box
--------------------
SuperDrive
1TB HDD or 2TB HDD
HDTV Dual Tuner

Software/Features
--------------------
DVR
DVD Player
Everything AppleTV does currently
Web Browser
Mobile Me access to DVR schedule, etc.
Is NOT paired with iTunes on PC or Mac to manage library, acts as media server
Burn CDs & DVDs
Rip CDs & DVDs

Accessories
--------------------
A real remote, not that piddly little Apple remote (but the iPhone Remote app is nice)

I absolutely HATE my ComCast DVR and would love to be able to own my own device like the one spec'd above instead.

matthijn
Aug 20, 2009, 03:35 PM
Great, so when can we start renting movies here in Europe? Well, the Netherlands that is.

robogobo
Aug 20, 2009, 03:35 PM
not. going. to. happen.

dotheDVDeed
Aug 20, 2009, 03:41 PM
Ugh, just add HDMI with digital sound passthrough to the mac mini and we'll take it from there. (Okay you can boost the on board video while you at it)

Xavier
Aug 20, 2009, 03:41 PM
If they did offer a TV, it would be way out of my price range for a TV.

SkippyThorson
Aug 20, 2009, 03:43 PM
I did my own marketing class project on this in college. Ah, the memories. Good to see I was right, bad to know I'm not getting paid.

dubhe
Aug 20, 2009, 03:43 PM
If they did offer a TV, it would be way out of my price range for a TV.

Ha, my TV is still a CRT. 9 years old and still going strong :D

netdoc66
Aug 20, 2009, 03:44 PM
I just saw the analyst conceptual mockup and it looks like a 55" iPhone with a home button as the only control on the device. Shiny:apple:

dubhe
Aug 20, 2009, 03:45 PM
I just saw the analyst conceptual mockup and it looks like a 55" iPhone with a home button as the only control on the device. Shiny:apple:

So just like the giant iPhones in the retail stores but in landscape mode :o

jaw04005
Aug 20, 2009, 03:46 PM
Does Munster really think iTunes customers are going to give up their perfectly good HDTV sets to buy an Apple-branded set? Get real.

If anything, Apple may partner with a major TV manufacturer to include the Apple TV software built-in. However, there is no chance in hell they're going into the TV business.

Even this is doubtful, since Apple seems incapable of working as a partner with anyone (HP iPod failed, Motorola ROKR failed, Bandai Pipen failed, etc) on a product.

gugy
Aug 20, 2009, 03:46 PM
I have been hearing this crap for years.

The market is so saturate and with minimal profit margins and huge competition for low prices. So not happening.

Just move on.

GQB
Aug 20, 2009, 03:49 PM
I've yet to see a compelling reason that Apple would get into the all-in-one TV market.
Not only are monitors a commodity (i.e. low margin... not Apple's ball o'wax), but all-in-one's are an idiotic product to begin with. Monitor, I/O, receiver, and DVR technologies do not change at the same rate. Why buy (or sell) a product that locks consumers into upgrading based purely on the most expensive component? If I've sunk $2000 into an all-in-one, I'm far less likely to upgrade any individual component, and that doesn't serve anyone well.

Also, just how do 50" + TVs fit into the Apple Store model? Enormous investment and expansion needed in floor, display, and warehouse space, plus infrastructure to facilitate deliveries.

I call BS on this.

Eric S.
Aug 20, 2009, 03:49 PM
It's silly. Anyone can make wild predictions, with the hope that one lucky shot will result in a "visionary" label.

GQB
Aug 20, 2009, 03:51 PM
Even this is doubtful, since Apple seems incapable of working as a partner with anyone (HP iPod failed, Motorola ROKR failed, Bandai Pipen failed, etc) on a product.

Yeah... remember that huge failure in partnering with AT&T?
oh, right...

RyanR.
Aug 20, 2009, 03:54 PM
Slow MacRumors month.... considering next months keynote. Unless Steve or Phil releases something very new or different I would say even :apple: is suffering from the US retail market. No matter what the numbers say which I don't know how the computer company is doing the iPhone is rocking the charts. Steve please don't forget that you make computers:rolleyes:

billystlyes
Aug 20, 2009, 03:56 PM
I'm sure Mr. Munster will be right about this one. :rolleyes:

BTW: Worst product ever by Apple in its current form.

jaw04005
Aug 20, 2009, 03:56 PM
Yeah... remember that huge failure in partnering with AT&T?
oh, right...

AT&T wasn't Apple's development partner on the iPhone. They didn't help produce it or create it. In fact, AT&T has acknowledged that their agreement with Apple let Apple do it all. It's a service exclusivity agreement. That's completely different than having someone partner with you on the development of a product.

RyanR.
Aug 20, 2009, 03:57 PM
Yeah... remember that huge failure in partnering with AT&T?
oh, right...
:rolleyes:MMS, Tethering:rolleyes: Where are those again?

MrCrowbar
Aug 20, 2009, 03:57 PM
I seriously doubt Apple would actually produce a set, as in a LCD, plasma or other forms. However, I do think they will unleash a major upgrade to the Apple TV product. Here's my expectations and wishlist...

Inputs
--------------------
CableCard slot
Coaxial In
HDMI (BluRay input, etc. - as I doubt they will ever produce a BluRay player)
Gigabit Ethernet
USB

Outputs
--------------------
HDMI
Component Video Out
Digital Audio Out

In The Box
--------------------
SuperDrive
1TB HDD or 2TB HDD
HDTV Dual Tuner

Software/Features
--------------------
DVR
DVD Player
Everything AppleTV does currently
Web Browser
Mobile Me access to DVR schedule, etc.
Is NOT paired with iTunes on PC or Mac to manage library, acts as media server
Burn CDs & DVDs
Rip CDs & DVDs

Accessories
--------------------
A real remote, not that piddly little Apple remote (but the iPhone Remote app is nice)

I absolutely HATE my ComCast DVR and would love to be able to own my own device like the one spec'd above instead.

So basically you want a Mac Mini with an external hard drive and an eyeTV for the cableCard and Coax.

I just saw the analyst conceptual mockup and it looks like a 55" iPhone with a home button as the only control on the device. Shiny:apple:

55" multitouch TV? Gimme gimme! :D

JAT
Aug 20, 2009, 04:03 PM
Just add the features to the Apple TV and we're already there.

Just add a tuner and an HDMI input to the iMac and we're already there.

BuddyTronic
Aug 20, 2009, 04:04 PM
http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/articlepics/mactv/image2.jpg

They won't? (http://lowendmac.com/500/macintosh-tv.html);)


Yeah exactly they did it once before.

Apple would be great for an HD version now. They could solve the "too many remotes" problem that has been around for the last 20 years, and combine it with some TIVO PVR functionality and like the Apple TV small box thing, it could do movies through iTunes of course.

GQB
Aug 20, 2009, 04:05 PM
:rolleyes:MMS, Tethering:rolleyes: Where are those again?

Didn't say AT&T didn't suck. :)
Different issue. But that's AT&T's failure, not Apple's.

JAT
Aug 20, 2009, 04:06 PM
I absolutely HATE my ComCast DVR and would love to be able to own my own device like the one spec'd above instead.

Both sat companies' DVRs are so much better (and virtually always less $$/month), the Comcast DVR shouldn't even be allowed to use that generic term. You should consider switching.

Sorry to be a bit off topic.

KCMichaelB
Aug 20, 2009, 04:09 PM
I just saw the analyst conceptual mockup and it looks like a 55" iPhone with a home button as the only control on the device. Shiny:apple:

Do you have to shake it to change channels? That's a dealbreaker for me.:D

Tilpots
Aug 20, 2009, 04:09 PM
there is no need for a dvr if you can stream it on demand any time you want.

A DVR would allow you to get free over-the-air programming. If you stream it, they can charge you for it.;)

sauer228
Aug 20, 2009, 04:14 PM
I'd hate to see the price on an Apple LCD TV. :eek:

Speedy2
Aug 20, 2009, 04:19 PM
I'd hate to see the price on an Apple LCD TV. :eek:


Go into a random store and check out the better Sony, Samsung, Toshiba and Panasonic models. Do you go :eek: too when you see these, or do you rather admire the sheer greatness of what you see?

Apple would enter a market that is already full of _good_ competition. They'd rather sell chicken salad than TVs.

Target362
Aug 20, 2009, 04:26 PM
Why oh why do we have to read posts from this moron!! He makes stuff up and has no inside information. Apple will never enter that market.

Think again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_TV

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Interactive_Television_Box

I was only 3 years old when this came out. Were you even born yet?

As for the "new" apple TV set, heres what I see.


Internet integration. Being able to have access to your i tunes library from the remote control as well as buy and download.
DVR eirther standard or as an add on package
Mobile me will some how be integrated in the device
Widgets that will display traffic and weather updates
all the ports listed above by "Eric"
LED standard. (by 2011, LED will be more mainstream)i'll post more later.

macAllen
Aug 20, 2009, 04:31 PM
Whats Next?

It was the iCar...
http://i28.tinypic.com/2vv10th.jpg
http://i30.tinypic.com/5bqk3m.jpg

Then It Is An Apple Tv.

I Wont Be Surprised The Future Will Be Run By Every Thing Apple Inc. :D

http://i32.tinypic.com/2rwxbb4.jpg
http://i31.tinypic.com/35i1u6g.jpg

Target362
Aug 20, 2009, 04:37 PM
Now your getting a bit silly. I highly dobut apple and steve will take over the world. To many half bitten decomposing apples around :D


:rolleyes:MMS, Tethering:rolleyes: Where are those again?

Thats ATT, not Apple.

iphones4evry1
Aug 20, 2009, 04:42 PM
Such a product is obsolete before it is even released.

I have an HDTV right now plugged into my cable box/DVR. I have an HDMI cable plugged into the back of my TV and the other end of the cord is next to my sofa. When I want to plug my laptop into my TV, it's easy as 123. I already have Youtube, and EVERYTHING that my computer does already on my HDTV. What could this product possibly offer in addition?


images

Since Apple is headquartered near San Francisco, how about The Golden Gate Bridge?

In the same way that corporations have their names on sports stadiums (think Staples Center), it is entirely possible for Apple to workout a deal with a city to get their logo on a bridge like this. How about a stadium? "The Apple Center" or "SuperBowl XX___ at Apple Stadium"

Eric8199
Aug 20, 2009, 04:50 PM
If AppleTV had DVR functionality, I'd buy one today. Currently it's pretty much a waste of time/space, and I have no interest in it.

jettredmont
Aug 20, 2009, 04:55 PM
I don't know what Apple would do, but it appears there are a few options here.

Most evolutionary, is leaving the existing setup (ATV connected to any generic HDTV via a single HDMI cable and possibly to your stereo system via a single optical digital audio cable). I really don't think a total of three cables (two power cables and one data cable connecting them) is significantly worse than one cable (just power in) for the base wifi system, but I can see Jobs differing in opinion. When it comes to the jumble of wires in a typical home theater system, though, the extra two wires are completely insignificant unless your home theater system gets its power from the air and uses 8 (7.1) wireless speakers.

So, let's focus here first.

Take an AppleTV and add:

* Ability to watch advertiser-funded shows. That is, allow something like Hulu streaming to the ATV.
* MAYBE if they are generous, a DVD player. Without that, I just rip it on my Mac and download to the ATV, but having a DVD player built-in would make it easier to watch something quickly.

That's it. The "DVR" idea is silly, if you are assuming a fat and always-on internet connection. Just stream what you want to watch when you want to watch it. If you want it always available then download it to your disk for the $1.99 fee, and watch it even if it ceases being available for streaming.

Personally, I haven't had cable or satellite for just about a year now, and have been "living off" a combination of Hulu, AppleTV, and DVD box sets (for Showtime series). It's actually been quite great. And the extra $85 per month to spend on niceties like food has been nice too. The thing that keeps me off the ATV, though, is the lack of advertiser-funded programming. Not every show is worth $1.99 to watch. Sometimes - in fact, most often - I'd rather invest 5 minutes of ignoring commercials on Hulu instead.

Okay, then there's the next level: integrate ATV and the TV.

This is as stupid of an idea as integrating the computer and monitor.

That having been said, it would likely be a pretty big hit. It would remove two cords in the simplest of systems, although the heftier systems would likely rather just have a set-top box (if for no other reason than to have less to replace when one of the components breaks or needs updating).

Again, though: anyone saying there should be a DVR in there is completely missing the point. The "DVR" is the $1.99 per show download from Apple (or $x per season subscription). That's it.

xbjllb
Aug 20, 2009, 05:06 PM
Great. First trying to be Mattel, now trying to be Curtis Mathes.

Here's an idea... how about trying to make state of the art desktop personal computers for a change?

:apple:

CMelton
Aug 20, 2009, 05:08 PM
This is from a thread back in february when i posted a link to an article along the same lines...


http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=7079411#post7079411

so maybe its possible....

Bjohnson33
Aug 20, 2009, 05:09 PM
Just add the features to the Apple TV and we're already there.

Exactly. I'm really looking forward to the next iteration of the Apple TV. I think it's pretty good now, but I don't think it has fully hit its stride yet.

Target362
Aug 20, 2009, 05:09 PM
Great. First trying to be Mattel, now trying to be Curtis Mathes.

Here's an idea... how about trying to make state of the art desktop personal computers for a change?

:apple:

and that means more then silly unibody designs, buttonless touchpads and not following port standards like firewirwe

Thunderbird
Aug 20, 2009, 05:15 PM
Is Gene Munster related to Herman Munster? :)

reallynotnick
Aug 20, 2009, 05:17 PM
I personally rather see Apple update the Apple TV. Make it more powerful with full 1080p support.
Maybe even pioneer a new subscription model that can do away with cable/satellite providers.
Add support for games.

Basically just make the Apple TV the must have digital media center, heck make it so good that it is the only box I need under my TV (besides sound system). I know it's far fetched but a hell of a lot better idea then building a TV. But hey if they sold a separate box AND had a TV with the functions built in, well then, cool beans.

jettredmont
Aug 20, 2009, 05:24 PM
A DVR would allow you to get free over-the-air programming. If you stream it, they can charge you for it.;)

If you stream it they can make sure you get time-relevant commercials that pay for it. If you DVR it you get to fast-forward through (a lot) of commercials that are out of date by the time you watch it.

When advertising is more reliable (ex, with Hulu where you can not fast forward through it) it is feasible for there to be much less of it (hence about 2 minutes of advertising on 22 minutes of content, instead of 8 minutes or more).

Or are you convinced that your TV should be free of cost and free of advertising? 'Cause AppleTV currently offers that too: it's called "Podcasts" (although quite a few of them are ad-funded too, of course).

Personally, I'd rather stream 90% of what I watch, and download a few select shows to be watched commercial-free whenever I want. Both models need to be in place. "DVR" is just a way of translating time-based broadcast to a download; I'm fine with paying for the download and removing the ads at the same time.

txr0ckabilly
Aug 20, 2009, 05:27 PM
piss off with the apple television!

give me a fully functional/fully integrated/7.1/wifi/bluetooth enabled apple home stereo system.

give me an apple car stereo system with wifi/bluetooth so i can download songs from/to my car in my driveway in the evening or before i leave.

this would would truly make me happy. i'm on the road way too much to need the television (unless of course it was a tv in my car)

MacFly123
Aug 20, 2009, 05:27 PM
This guy has zero understanding of Apple. TVs are a commodity, they're interchangeable. Apple doesn't sell commodities. I do think they'll add more features to Apple TV over time, but they would never go beyond that and sell an actual TV. That's just a dumb idea.

Yes. As Cook said, they will continue to invest, and I expect an update and added features, but not what he is talking about. Ultimately it would be great, but I don't see them making a TV. Why do that when people can just buy the box and connect it to any tv?

What I see happening is the Tablet connecting to the TV through Apple TV and expanding the App Store to your TV. That is what I think Apple needs to do, and it would be HUGE. They really need to get on the ball with all that!

RyanR.
Aug 20, 2009, 05:38 PM
Now your getting a bit silly. I highly dobut apple and steve will take over the world. To many half bitten decomposing apples around :D




Thats ATT, not Apple.

i understand that I wasspeaking of partnerships and how they don't usally work hence ...AT&T sucks!
but i didnt make it clear sorry:o

yetanotherdave
Aug 20, 2009, 05:39 PM
Let me guess, it would be HD, but only 720p, there would be no HDMI port, just display port, all content would have to be pre-approved by apple, no programs with swearing or nudity. Definitely no fart programs for the first year until they work out an age rating system. The TV would be locked to one cable provider that doesn't carry the channels people want. The only remote supplied would be the one you get macbooks,



and I'd still buy one.

txr0ckabilly
Aug 20, 2009, 05:41 PM
Let me guess, it would be HD, but only 720p, there would be no HDMI port, just display port, all content would have to be pre-approved by apple, no programs with swearing or nudity. Definitely no fart programs for the first year until they work out an age rating system. The TV would be locked to one cable provider that doesn't carry the channels people want. The only remote supplied would be the one you get macbooks,


that's funny, sick, and true.


and I'd still buy one.


sadly.... i would too

old-wiz
Aug 20, 2009, 05:57 PM
Hmm.. Right now I subscribe to Verizon FIOS for TV, phone, and internet. The most expensive component is TV. Suppose Apple upgraded the Apple TV (never mind a real TV) box and there was enough to dump FIOS TV. Do you think Verizon would like that? Odds are they would start implementing usage caps to prevent us from getting out TV from Apple TV rather than Verizon. Same thing for other cable/internet providers.

sauer228
Aug 20, 2009, 06:05 PM
Go into a random store and check out the better Sony, Samsung, Toshiba and Panasonic models. Do you go :eek: too when you see these, or do you rather admire the sheer greatness of what you see?

Apple's prices would blow the doors off the current prices and wouldn't look back.

puffnstuff
Aug 20, 2009, 06:28 PM
$30-45 a month for TV shows?

bahahahaaaaaaaaaa who the hell would pay for that?

Apple TV is a fail

jettredmont
Aug 20, 2009, 07:13 PM
$30-45 a month for TV shows?

bahahahaaaaaaaaaa who the hell would pay for that?

Apple TV is a fail

I hope you're being sarcastic. In case you are not, let me remind you that a vast majority of US households currently pay $50-$100 per month for advertising-laden TV already. A good portion pay in the range of $100-200 per month. And, those costs go up every single year.

So, yeah. Who the hell would pay half or a third as much as they currently pay, for the up-front cost of buying Apple-manufactured hardware?

killerrobot
Aug 20, 2009, 07:21 PM
I hope you're being sarcastic. In case you are not, let me remind you that a vast majority of US households currently pay $50-$100 per month for advertising-laden TV already. A good portion pay in the range of $100-200 per month. And, those costs go up every single year.


Where do you live that people are paying those prices for TV because you're getting ripped off.
Most companies offer phone, TV and internet bundles for around $100 a month.
http://www.att.com/gen/general?pid=7685
http://www.timewarnercable.com/SoCal/learn/bundles/default.html
etc...

Bubba Satori
Aug 20, 2009, 07:22 PM
Anything but new computers or ACDs. :mad:

BG-Mac
Aug 20, 2009, 07:47 PM
If Apple could cut a deal with ESPN, the NFL, and the NCAA I would drop cable like a bad habit. But until they can offer live sports I will sadly be a Comcast subscriber.. :(

tabasco70
Aug 20, 2009, 07:51 PM
"Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill"

Don't think for a minute the cable companies like that idea one bit.



The internet is slowly taking over (or at least pushing aside) services like cellphone/telephone, cable, etc.

With services like Google Voice and Skype available to make cheap calls with, and this potential Apple TV than can replace cable, companies like Verizon need to come up with a defensive strategy to fight them off.

iMaggot
Aug 20, 2009, 09:08 PM
Lol this is so fake :D

Perrumpo
Aug 20, 2009, 09:25 PM
I have worked with Apple/Mac products since 1989 and love Apple and the Mac.

However, there has been a marked decline in the quality of their products in the last 6 or 7 years. I attribute this to Apple's explosion of new products/markets and the dilution of their core design team as the best and brightest are pulled into new organizations and Apples hires more and more engineers from other SW companies (e.g. MS) who bring their PC ideals of quality with them.

I predict that as Apple continues to expand that Apple Quality Control will converge down to be no better than MS Quallity Control. Hope not, but it appears headed in that direction.

I hope they don't ultimately become a victim of their own success.

This is true. Our old Macs never had problems, yet all of the recent ones have been a mess. Their hardware quality has gone downhill. It's ridiculous that you NEED AppleCare with a new Mac because you know you will have to use it. Adding $250-$350 to an already-expensive computer is a tough hit to take.

trip1ex
Aug 20, 2009, 09:30 PM
Won't happen.

Sure the guy's gotta make predictions to excite clients so they give him money.

But makes no sense. What can they do by making the TV that they can't do by just making the box?

Answer: Nothing.

So won't happen.

Their real TV is the iMac. I wouldn't doubt if they make a larger iMac, but they aren't going to make a TV. The lcd screens are imacs and Apple's monitors and probably their tablets.

skellener
Aug 20, 2009, 11:05 PM
...built-in DVR... Apple will NEVER ship anything with a DVR. It is not their model. Why would they include a DVR when they make their money on iTunes downloads??? A TV with built-in support for iTunes downloads? Absolutely. DVR? Not gonna happen in this life time. It's just not.

SandynJosh
Aug 20, 2009, 11:07 PM
Microsoft has just announced that they will be releasing a similar TV but with more features. It will look like a coffee table with a glass surface. When you are finished watching it for the night all you need to do is swipe your hand down toward the lower left corner and a menu will appear. Just tap the "Start" to quit.

mcdj
Aug 21, 2009, 12:24 AM
You heard it here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=508364) first!

puffnstuff
Aug 21, 2009, 12:34 AM
I hope you're being sarcastic. In case you are not, let me remind you that a vast majority of US households currently pay $50-$100 per month for advertising-laden TV already. A good portion pay in the range of $100-200 per month. And, those costs go up every single year.

So, yeah. Who the hell would pay half or a third as much as they currently pay, for the up-front cost of buying Apple-manufactured hardware?

Who the hell pays that kind of money for cable? I pay $36 for cable + internet but I am cutting the cable since it now comes with my rent.

Besides almost anything you want to see is on the internet so why pay $300+ a year for something you can get for free?

Michael CM1
Aug 21, 2009, 01:15 AM
If the cost of ACDs is any indication of some TV set, count me out.

Streaming content is nowhere near as popular as optical media and cable/satellite services. Apple just hit 25 percent of the music market a good 7 or so years into selling it. The main success was the iTunes store combined with iTunes (on computers) and iPods. You could still play your CDs while Apple kept offering you that alternative of buying their music online. As iPods got cheaper and more functional, more people scooped them up. CDs and digital audio files co-exist perfectly fine, and I doubt that will really change until every single person in this country owns a computer, broadband connection and iPod or something similar.

The same goes with video/home theater. If Apple were to build a unit with an optical drive and iPhone-like OS and app store, it would be a killer box. The ATV playback software seems to be like the mentally challenged cousin of iTunes, which is a main thing holding me back from buying an ATV. What I basically want is a lesser-featured Mac mini that I don't need a keyboard/mouse or crappy Apple Remote to control. I love watching seasons of TV shows in iTunes that keep playing via playlists. Yet ATV doesn't do that.

If it were my project, here's my lineup:

$149: 40GB-ish ATV, no optical drive
$249: 80GB-ish ATV, DVD drive
$349: 120GB-ish ATV, BD drive

You could interchange these HDDs and even offer SSDs. I would personally use desktop hard drives and just make the damn thing bigger so money could be saved. These would all use an Atom CPU and have whatever memory is needed for such a device. Open up an app store for it and watch it turn into a poor man's gaming console plus media hub. Add some remote with multi-touch and you've got a winner.

fltman
Aug 21, 2009, 02:25 AM
About time if you ask me. The other day I sat in my sofa, watching a show on TV and they presented a URL on screen and my laptop was in the other room and I thought to myself "why dont they have a PiP built in web browser in the TV? Then I would have checked ou this URL right away."

christian_k
Aug 21, 2009, 03:12 AM
I would like to see more innovations on computers (more than just nice looking aluminium enclosures), but Apple more and more moves towards stupid "pay, sit back and consume only" devices...

Christian

Kelmon
Aug 21, 2009, 03:13 AM
Well, if this is indeed the case and Apple plans to release a television then I can only say that, for me, this is too late. We only just replaced our old CRT set with a 42" LCD that will do full HD so I can't see my wife approving the purchase of something else within the next 10-years. With so many people now with LCD televisions and the like following the price crash over recent years, I honestly wonder how big the market is for such devices now and whether Apple will have "missed the boat". A set-top box (like the Apple TV) makes much more sense since this will integrate with what the customer already has without needing them to make an expensive purchase.

I'm therefore simply hoping that they are going to overhaul the Apple TV by bringing it up-to-date and slashing its price to something sensible. Given the announcement earlier this week, you can buy a PS3 for the same price as the basic Apple TV (at least in Europe - not sure about the US) and that'll do more, plus is likely to be around for longer.

Optimus Frag
Aug 21, 2009, 05:06 AM
Not gonna happen. Ever.

Bubba Satori
Aug 21, 2009, 05:20 AM
Apple TV set hobby bag of hurt.

RTee
Aug 21, 2009, 05:45 AM
Yet another douche looking for a headline

MikeDTyke
Aug 21, 2009, 05:56 AM
Dear god,

what a bunch naysayers and whiney b*s.

I envisage a lower end AppleTV, based on iPhone chipset to reduce power requirements and price.

At the high end a single panel from the likes of LG or Samsung, branded with the Apple Logo and the AppleTV Unit built in.

That gives them the opportunity to sell to someone who really likes the integration a premium product from Apple can provide and for everyone else they can choose a HD panel from whomever they like and plug the next gen AppleTV in.

It's minimal risk for Apple to resell 1 panel and sure it might go the way of the iPod HiFi or the Cube, but if it's successful i think it'll be a nice if smaller biz than Mac or iPod.

M. :D

peterdevries
Aug 21, 2009, 06:21 AM
Dear god,

what a bunch naysayers and whiney b*s.

I envisage a lower end AppleTV, based on iPhone chipset to reduce power requirements and price.

At the high end a single panel from the likes of LG or Samsung, branded with the Apple Logo and the AppleTV Unit built in.

That gives them the opportunity to sell to someone who really likes the integration a premium product from Apple can provide and for everyone else they can choose a HD panel from whomever they like and plug the next gen AppleTV in.

It's minimal risk for Apple to resell 1 panel and sure it might go the way of the iPod HiFi or the Cube, but if it's successful i think it'll be a nice if smaller biz than Mac or iPod.

M. :D

Like many here said, it's not necessarily a bad idea if it is implemented well, but the evidence that Munster bases it on is just plain ridiculous. Or he must know something that he didn't write. His predictions have never been very dependable though..

xbjllb
Aug 21, 2009, 07:12 AM
and that means more then silly unibody designs, buttonless touchpads and not following port standards like firewirwe

No, it doesn't. That's not cutting-edge; it's fascist dictate.

:apple:

Tilpots
Aug 21, 2009, 07:45 AM
Apple will NEVER ship anything with a DVR. It is not their model. Why would they include a DVR when they make their money on iTunes downloads??? A TV with built-in support for iTunes downloads? Absolutely. DVR? Not gonna happen in this life time. It's just not.

Then you may be gone soon.;)

Really, please wrap your brain around the fact that apple is a hardware company. They don't exist to sell other people's content. They exist to sell hardware. DVR = better hardware. Better hardware = more sales. Do try to pay attention.:rolleyes:

ericinboston
Aug 21, 2009, 07:57 AM
I guess I was right...Apple IS moving further towards a consumer electronics company and AWAY from the computer industry.

Now for a little synicism:

Headlines to appear over the next 18 months at Macrumors:

1)Apple Abandons Mac Mini
2)Apple Abandons Mac Pro Since Sales are Under 14 Units Sold Per Year
3)Apple Abandons iMac

:)

-Eric

Speedy2
Aug 21, 2009, 07:57 AM
Apple's prices would blow the doors off the current prices and wouldn't look back.

You mean like iPods, iPhones and Mac are all so much more expensive than any competitive high-end product (ironic!!) ? Have you ever shopped outside Wal-Mart?

Speedy2
Aug 21, 2009, 08:03 AM
Then you may be gone soon.;)

Really, please wrap your brain around the fact that apple is a hardware company. They don't exist to sell other people's content. They exist to sell hardware. DVR = better hardware. Better hardware = more sales. Do try to pay attention.:rolleyes:

If Apple wanted to sell a DVR, the would have done so with the introduction of the Apple TV. TiVo is making losses, what the heck is Apple doing in this business? They are smart and staying out of it. No money to be made and nothing but hassle with cable companies.

Tilpots
Aug 21, 2009, 08:10 AM
If Apple wanted to sell a DVR, the would have done so with the introduction of the Apple TV. TiVo is making losses, what the heck is Apple doing in this business? They are smart and staying out of it. No money to be made and nothing but hassle with cable companies.

Wrong. If Apple wanted to sell the AppleTV, they would have added a DVR. TiVo is not "making losses." As has been mentioned numerous times, Apple should be trying to capture the money people are paying the cable companies. Apple can offer the a la carte buying of programming theat the cable companies never will. They need to add a DVR so that people can watch what they already get for free, and supplement the big networks with offerings that aren't already available in your community.

dbwie
Aug 21, 2009, 08:18 AM
To completely replace cable and satellite TV, Apple would need to work out a deal with the major sports leagues to stream games for a reasonable price. Until that happens, I still need cable. I would get blacked out from my favorite teams in I didn't watch them where they are now.

Apple streams mlb.tv to the iPhone. I would bet that appleTV is next. Also, the Yankees are currently the only team that allows in-market streaming of games, but other teams may soon follow. It's not impossible that sports leagues will get on board.

SandynJosh
Aug 21, 2009, 12:00 PM
Apple will NEVER ship anything with a DVR. It is not their model. Why would they include a DVR when they make their money on iTunes downloads??? A TV with built-in support for iTunes downloads? Absolutely. DVR? Not gonna happen in this life time. It's just not.

Already happening:

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/mac_accessories/storage?mco=NjcxMTU1MQ

So, long, nice to have known ya,

carlgo
Aug 21, 2009, 12:11 PM
An expensive tv crammed full of stuff makes no sense. Snore.

How would that be exciting? I would rather wait for a reasonably priced OLED or some other compelling visual technology.

Apple could make some sort of all-in-one box to handle the roles of HT receivers, ATVs, Tivos, various players, etc.

Home theater is now dominated by overly-complex arrays of devices that confuse so many people. A simple and compelling Apple device that cleaned up all this stuff would probably sell well.

savar
Aug 21, 2009, 12:24 PM
Okay, so the guy doesn't know what he's talking about. But I've always liked the idea of an Apple TV. (Not the actual Apple TV, but a real TV, of course.)

Home entertainment is complicated and requires lots of different components. Even if you know what you're doing, it takes a lot of time and money to piece together all the right, matching pieces. And you have to run at least a half dozen cables to get everything setup.

Every home entertainment system ends up being highly unique, and therefore, even more complicated since no one person can troubleshoot all of them.

Here's how I envision the perfect Apple TV:

Integrated cable tuner. 2 cable card slots available. No need to rent a lousy, low-end box from the cable company anymore.
Built-in bluray player. No need to worry about component or HDMI. It's just built in.
Integrated DVR. Again, fewer cables. Plus even Tivo (as good as it is) leaves a lot to be desired. It's slow and still a bit clunky. Apple could crush them on UI and usability.
Built in graphics card. This graphics card would do multiple duty as it helps process, smooth, and scale video from all built-in sources: Blu Ray, DVR, and Cable. No need for each box to have its own, separate logic. (Most TVs have one also, so you end up with 3-4 of these chipsets spread throughout your system.)
Wifi and ethernet ready. Syncs with itunes like the current Apple TV product but can also stream.
Runs a stripped down OS X, like the existing Apple TV. (Hackers will love this. And a good hacking communicty does a LOT for building brand rapport.)
Integrated app store. Content providers can release apps to update additoinal content, or overlay information. So Hulu gives away an app for free. Maybe ESPN has a sports ticker overlay that costs $1.99. bloomberg can add a stock ticker overlay on top of anything you are watching, etc.
Gaming controllers. The iphone has turned out to be a surprising little gaming platform. If Apple has bluetooth gaming controllers with accelerometers or infrared (like Wii), then the app store opens up a lot of game possibilities. It won't beat the Xbox or PS3 for raw power, but Nintendo has revealed that there is a huge market of non-hardcore people who would play games if the barrier to entry was much lower (cost and learning curve).


This system would appeal to anybody looking for Apple-style simplicity in a home entertainment product. You plugin the power and the cable connection and -- to quote Steve, "Boom" -- you're done. An entire home entertainment system in just a few minutes.

The only missing piece is an audio receiver, but I imagine third parties would jump into build that missing piece.

Sure, TVs are low margin and not Apple's domain of expertise. But so were mp3 players. Apple watchers were extremely critical when they released the original iPod. It was a saturated market, and their product was overpriced, with features that nobody needed. The result? The most iconic consumer product since the Coca Cola bottle or the Nike swoosh.

Then apple did it again with the iphone: crowded market, commoditization of the handsets (you buy the plan, not the handset, etc.), and Apple didn't have any experience in it!! And yet the iphone is crushing other smartphones, even eroding market share for the venerable (and still very useful) Blackberry. The iPhone fails to match up to the BlackBerry in many ways, and it costs more than the average blackberry, but the style and simplicity of the whole package have more than compensated.

Sorry.... long rant. To sum up: I would buy the product described above in a heartbeat.

savar
Aug 21, 2009, 12:27 PM
I guess I was right...Apple IS moving further towards a consumer electronics company and AWAY from the computer industry.

Now for a little synicism:

Headlines to appear over the next 18 months at Macrumors:

1)Apple Abandons Mac Mini
2)Apple Abandons Mac Pro Since Sales are Under 14 Units Sold Per Year
3)Apple Abandons iMac

:)

-Eric

The Mac will be the "digital hub" of Apple's electronics offerings for years to come. I doubt they abandon their main lines of business simply because this has been their plan all along. But then they realized that the peripherals to that hub would be profitable businesses as well.

But they would be dead stupid not to go out and gain lots of money in other industries. Yeah, it's probably a distraction to their core business, but I'm perfectly happy with the laptops they are making now. And Snow Leopard is going to be a huge (read: untouchable) leap ahead for their computing technology.

rdowns
Aug 21, 2009, 12:59 PM
Munster is out of his mind. Where do I send him a letter? 1313 Mockingbird Lane?

dmm219
Aug 21, 2009, 01:00 PM
"Such a product would effectively replace a consumer's monthly cable bill"

Don't think for a minute the cable companies like that idea one bit.

For $40 a month, cable would still be a much great value than an Itunes pass. If this is the price...i'll stick with ala cart...

jettredmont
Aug 21, 2009, 01:18 PM
Where do you live that people are paying those prices for TV because you're getting ripped off.
Most companies offer phone, TV and internet bundles for around $100 a month.
http://www.att.com/gen/general?pid=7685
http://www.timewarnercable.com/SoCal/learn/bundles/default.html
etc...

Looking at the non-bundled services, and add $10/month ($5 for local programming, $5 for the privilege of using a DVR), the cost at AT&T is $45/month for 12 months, then $61/month thereafter (they say the introductory price yields a $16 credit on your account per month, getting it to the quoted prices). Add in one or two "premium" channels and you're well into the average $50-100 range. Add in HD programming, and you're in the high end of that range. Add in a couple pay-per-view events and you're well beyond it.

Again, I'm speaking about actual reported average subscriptions from actual real-life people. Introductory offers from companies will always be significantly cheaper than what people actually pay, both because people tend to add on the things that are intentionally left out of those offers (like foolishly wanting to watch their local news station instead of CNN and Fox's cable abominations) and because those introductory prices expire long before people switch to other services.

I live in northern California, for the record. My choices here for TV service are Surewest (coming in on phone lines), Comcast, or DirecTV/Dish. AT&T's prices are in the ballpark of what Comcast and DirecTV offer, and with a similar set of "gotchas". I can't say for certain on Surewest, but going on general impressions when I last looked, they had higher-priced "deals" but with fewer gotchas ... coming out to about the same cost overall.

jettredmont
Aug 21, 2009, 01:24 PM
Who the hell pays that kind of money for cable? I pay $36 for cable + internet but I am cutting the cable since it now comes with my rent.

Besides almost anything you want to see is on the internet so why pay $300+ a year for something you can get for free?

Apparently a lot of Comcast customers:

From http://www.newser.com/article/d99tefdo0/comcast-reports-53-pct-jump-in-profit-on-higher-revenue-but-subscriber-growth-slows.html


Customers spent more per month on average on video and Internet services, but not phone. Video revenue per customer rose 7.4 percent to $117.74, helped by higher prices and customers signing up for premium services such as HD packages as they stayed home to watch entertainment rather than going out.


Again, in real life, not in the glossy ads Comcast sends in the mail: they get over $100 per month from cable subscribers. That's cold hard cash, folks. If someone else can give the same service for $30 or so, they've got a powerful message. Granted, people are going to look at it and think there are the same kinds of hidden fees and "services" that the cable companies hit you with, but if $30 is real world costs then that will come out and drive people away from Cable.

[edit: added below]

For more:

* Directv: The average monthly revenue received from subscribers rose 1.7 percent to $83.16
* Time-Warner: Gets $2.667Billion in revenue from 13.105Million video (including triple-play and digital video) subscribers, for an astounding per-video-subscriber revenue of $203.51 (as of 1Q 2009 results; I didn't go to their 2Q statements to find the similar numbers there) - I might also note that year-to-year their video subscriber rolls went down 2% while their video revenues went up 8%. I'd really hate to be one of their customers!

Do it yourself: google "MyFavoritCableCompany Revenue per customer". Some will have a nice summary in the press; others you'll have to slog through the financial statements yourself (search for "subscribers" and "revenue" in the PDF docs and you should find the two relevant numbers). Enjoy!

w00master
Aug 21, 2009, 03:07 PM
Much as I'd love to see this, frankly I just don't see most of this happening.

... Unless Apple goes the iTV route, in which case *might* be possible. Still, I doubt it.


Please prove me wrong Apple! :)

w00master

satcomer
Aug 21, 2009, 07:34 PM
Whomever believes this is smoking something. Apple will NOT have a HDMI port because they passed over that proprietary port a while ago and went with the free Display Port (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort).

Do you kids have memory today?

zedsdead
Aug 21, 2009, 07:41 PM
Whomever believes this is smoking something. Apple will NOT have a HDMI port because they passed over that proprietary port a while ago and went with the free Display Port (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort).

Do you kids have memory today?

Apple uses an HDMI port in the Apple TV, and will have to if they want to keep selling a set top box. HDMI is not leaving the Apple TV.

satcomer
Aug 21, 2009, 07:45 PM
Apple uses an HDMI port in the Apple TV, and will have to if they want to keep selling a set top box. HDMI is not leaving the Apple TV.

I see that as chicken and egg sort of thing. Apple has to use HDMI because most TVs still use HDMI. Apple really didn't have a coice there and when the AppleTV came out Display port was ready for prime time.

rtdunham
Aug 21, 2009, 10:43 PM
...TiVo is making losses,..

fwiw i bought some TiVo stock last october. In 10 months it's up more than 80 percent. Not quite as good as apple's gains, but not shabby at all. Clearly many investors see bright prospects for the company.

btw, what prompted my investment 10 months ago? some analysts' reports praising the stock's prospects because, they said, the co had switched from selling hardware to licensing software.

I thought that reasoning was pertinent to some of the discussions here re: apple selling tv hardware vs licensing software to tv makers, etc. Make of it what you will.

goobot
Aug 22, 2009, 02:30 AM
so is it a tv or a box?

MacGuffin
Aug 22, 2009, 03:07 AM
If apple goes down this road, it will bankrupt them.

No way this will happen.

They can't compete in this market.

They don't even want to. TVs are a race to the bottom, no matter what features they have, because flat-screen tech is so fast-moving and so relatively immature.

Not a chance.

Hyuk yuk yuk.

The "race to the bottom" only means low commodity prices on mass market hardware.

Apple is in the business of rebadging such stuff and selling it at a markup (with a little value-added Jonathan Ive love and OS X to boot).

Furthermore, the whole TV equation is being changed by downloading. As with the iPod, Apple is poised to step in and skim off the action of a nation of file-trading sluts.

Cheap TV hardware + Ive jacket on top + iTunes vending for Mom and Dad + downloads-r-us for Everyone Else = Apple FTWM'fer

Bodypainter
Aug 22, 2009, 04:49 PM
munster is sooo clever: have they realized that there is not much demand for an apple tv? let me guess what munster predicts next that apple will "invent":

apple phone watch in 2012?
apple media tv wall in 2014?
apple branpod in 2020?

cjackson951
Aug 24, 2009, 07:54 PM
I didn't see anyone else post this, but for quite a while now I've had this image in my mind. Would anyone be surprised to see a 42" iMac with the required connectors to hook into your cable/satellite receiver, wireless keyboard and mouse (or keyboard w/integrated trackpad similar to macbook)

I'm sure there are 1000's of reasons this cannot possibly happen. I am just not going to be completely surprised if it does.