Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Foxconn Reportedly Testing Designs for 46-55 Inch Apple Television Sets

T

tann

macrumors 68000
Apr 15, 2010
1,944
813
UK
theOtherGeoff said:
Prior to cell phones most people had 2 phones in their house and never replaced them.

Your 1995 TV set is probably 100 lbs too. TVs are often limited by where cable is.

Most your argument makes sense. I do think the key issue is that TV will be the first device that starts the rotation of Apple from HW centric to Content (or Experience) centric. Opposed to now, Apple is building out content to make the HW they sell more valuable.... this will be where they sell TVs at near cost to sell convenient access to Apple content and experience. It's the ultimate 'docking station' for iOS/iCloud.

Think of it another way... Once you get an iOS TV that makes it painless to slurp $2.99 episodes of Survivor and 1st run movies, you're locked into iOS devices throughout the life of that TV.
Click to expand...

Yes people of course will replace, but Apple has to really really do something EXTREMELY compelling to get people to upgrade a TV! A phone, just toss out or recycle (a lot of the time for actual $$$$) whereas a TV (in the UK at least) cannot just be thrown or easily recycled (and when you can recycle you usually have to pay to get it done!).

They may release their own TV, but I cannot see it selling in the millions their other devices sell like. And people will not likely fork out $1000+ for a 45" TV in my opinion even if it is a fancy new shiny Apple iOSified beauty, some will, but the average consumer, who might pick up an iPad or iPhone I don't see doing it...

It's just my opinion, and after all of these rumors I am inclined to certainly think they want to build a TV set, but I just don't understand why as of this moment. Obviously Apple have something that they believe is the future, that they believe will be unique and something that people will feel that they need and I hope that we find out what it is!


jwdsail said:
Apple could surprise us and build a series of fantastic 4K displays w/ multiple HDMI inputs / 1 HDMI output (surround sound AV receiver output) and with a hidden dock for an AppleTV box that could be upgraded when needed/wanted...
Click to expand...

They could, but 4k is still a few years away from being in the $2000 price range (I believe) so if they did I'm not sure how small a market they are going to be attracting.

Unless of course, the Apple TV (box) could add the majority of features (apart from things like gesture or something) to an already existing TV. I want to see what they might have in store for people, at the moment I personally can't think of what it could be (am not the creative type lol).
 
6

6EQUJ5

macrumors newbie
Aug 5, 2010
21
0
content and pricing have to change first

i owned an an apple tv for years hooked up to my plasma - it works fine but with amazon prime, why should i continue to pay $19.99-$39.99 for a tv season when more than likely it's free to watch on amazon prime via my PS3???

i'm a huge apple customer. but unless apple changes it's pricing strategy to compete with amazon prime, then big shiny new screen with a silver apple logo at the bottom will be immaterial.

why should anyone throw good money away on itunes purchases. sure film rental prices are competitive but i started looking first on amazon prime to see if they have it free or cheaper... Amazon's UI is almost as good as Apple.

I have confidence that Apple can launch a screen to make my Pioneer plasma pale whether it is super HD, super wide 21:9 ratio or some new 3D tech that doesnt' suck but really content and pricing is where the living room war will be won.
 
yoak

yoak

macrumors 68000
Oct 4, 2004
1,672
203
Oslo, Norway
New this would be posted the day I finally ordered a new 50" TV:rolleyes:

Anyway, I´m a sucker for plasmas....

And my next TV will have to be 4K
 
M

mantan

macrumors 68000
Nov 2, 2009
1,743
1,041
DFW
bbeagle said:
Yes, I agree that this is a major problem.

However, Verizon, Comcast, etc. do not own any of the content, the Networks do. Do the Networks care whether Verizon, Comcast or Apple delivers this content? No. Depends who gives them the most money for their content.

One solution to the internet service providers is the government. The government can regulate internet costs.

Another solution is to have the content providers (network) pay for the internet costs by you paying for network content.

Things must change in a major way. Apple TV right now is just a hobby, because these problems don't have solutions as of yet.

----------



Entirely correct. If buying an Apple TV was the only way to get ESPN content, for example, this would change the game.

The only reason I subscribed to DirecTV at one time was because of NFL Sunday Ticket. All the other programming was the same.

Plus, Apple could even do something like, 'FREE TV' with a 2 year service contract. Something to change the game completely.
Click to expand...

But the only way it would 'change the game' is if it was more profitable than the current system.

Networks make a lot money selling bundled networks/content to distributors. They HATE the idea of a la carte pricing because it kills the golden goose. And that's just talking about channels, not individual show content. They have given in some areas....but not first run content and not most live sporting events....especially the big national money makers like the NFL and college football.

And quiet as it's kept, most customers don't want a la carte pricing either. They do when they mistakenly think they will pay a much lower price for a few channels, but for that model to work, it needs to bring in the same revenue for what people watch than being able to charge people a huge overhead for all the extra fluff. Networks are not going to endorse a model that provides them less income than they do right now. (That's where the TV model is different than the digital music issue that hit when piracy was rampant.)

Why on earth would ESPN want to provide content to Apple TV unless they were assured of getting more money than they get right now through cable/satellite? And don't you think those entities are going to be VERY protective of letting a third party bogart their current arrangement?

At some point the time may be right for it, but I'd be surprised if it was right in the next 5 years.
 
gkarris

gkarris

macrumors G3
Dec 31, 2004
8,301
1,061
"No escape from Reality...”
Michaelgtrusa said:
I don't see a out of this world price tag.
Click to expand...

mantan said:
It's Apple. How often is the price tag not 'a bit more than you really hoped to spend....'?
Click to expand...

Agreed....

Bose prices are $5,000 for 46" and $6,000 for 55" (Delivery and Setup included). I talked with the Bose Store person and he said they are selling pretty well. (IMHO - among the "well-to-do's"... :eek:)

http://www.bose.com/controller?url=..._built_in_home_theater/videowave_ii/index.jsp

So, an Apple Set with built in iPad/AppleTV hardware and the new App store for it at "Apple Prices" will sell great as well...
 
L

lilo777

macrumors 603
Nov 25, 2009
5,144
0
AppleScruff1

AppleScruff1

macrumors G4
Feb 10, 2011
10,026
2,949
gkarris said:
Agreed....

Bose prices are $5,000 for 46" and $6,000 for 55" (Delivery and Setup included). I talked with the Bose Store person and he said they are selling pretty well. (IMHO - among the "well-to-do's"... :eek:)

http://www.bose.com/controller?url=..._built_in_home_theater/videowave_ii/index.jsp

So, an Apple Set with built in iPad/AppleTV hardware and the new App store for it at "Apple Prices" will sell great as well...
Click to expand...

I'd be willing to bet "selling pretty well" isn't in the millions of sets at $5K each.
 
Last edited:
S

sir1963nz

macrumors 6502a
Feb 9, 2012
738
1,217
theluggage said:
Because whereas the 16:9 standard-def fishtank you bought in 2000 was perfectly good for 10 years or more, that sort of attitude won't keep the consumer electronics industry in the manner to which they are accustomed. Hence, you'll find that the 2011 Smart HD TV is already out of date - at least as far as the smart bit goes - and won't be receiving any updates.

People moan about Apple not supporting iOS 6 on the pre-3GS iPhone and withholding a few bells-and-whistles for the latest models, but if they provide the same level of support for an Apple TV then they'll be comfortably ahead of the game.

However, I kinda agree with you: what I'd like would be a "dumb" TV with just a nice display and some HDMI ports that left the "smart" stuff to the boxes you plugged in.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what I did. The Salesdroids tried to sell me on smart TVs, 3d TVs, Internet connected TVs etc etc all at a much higher price(and commission for them) and I fought them all the way and bough a brain dead basic 46" LCD with HDMI which I can plug my AppleTV into which streams movies of my Mac Mini running iTunes.
The Mac Mini has a 9TB RAID on it and all my DVDs are being ripped to it with Handbrake.
I can update my Mac mini, I can updates its software, I can add more storage, I can add an elgato eyeTV if I want, I can download movies off iTunes (I don't DVDs are cheaper, especially 2nd hand ones at $5 each).
I have Satellite TV with its own recorder, series record, etc etc etc.

There is nothing Apple could add, if content is the answer then that will come through iTunes.

My TV will be with me for probably 10 years, I am likely to go through 3 laptops in that time. There is NO MONEY in TVs for Apple.
 
M

Marlor

macrumors regular
Jun 21, 2005
233
65
gkarris said:
Bose prices are $5,000 for 46" and $6,000 for 55" (Delivery and Setup included). I talked with the Bose Store person and he said they are selling pretty well.
Click to expand...

Bose is more of a marketing-driven company than Apple. They have very poor engineering, but just market the hell out of their products in an attempt to build a reputation through sheer marketing force. In the audiophile world, they are considered a running-joke.

Apple wouldn't be competing with that. They are more of an engineering and design-focused company than Bose ever has been. I'm sure they will release a product that compares well with pretty much everything else in its price bracket.

They won't just do a Bose and release a product that costs several times more than everything else of comparable quality, then put full-page advertisements in the financial papers to attract buyers.
 
H

HenryDJP

Suspended
Nov 25, 2012
5,084
843
United States
saturn88 said:
Bang & Olussfen TV is $20,000
Sharp Elite 70" $8,000
Sharp Elite 60" $5,500
Click to expand...

B&O can get away with that because they have celebrities as customers. The Sharp Elite is by far the best LCD on the market. It's the closest thing to plasma in an LCD so for a 60 and 70" it can command that price.
 
Last edited:
T

Thunderhawks

Suspended
Feb 17, 2009
4,057
2,118
Jetson said:
Obviously someone at Apple knew that people would want to know when their iMac camera is ON.

Why some people here think that's not important simply baffles me.

We have wireless devices capable of sending voice and image data from our home to anywhere around the world. This is fine when that is our intention.

But with companies daily conducting unethical practices which invade our privacy, it seems to me that we have to be vigilant about things we never had to be concerned about before.


"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance." - John Philpot Curran, 1790
Click to expand...

To me it is the same as not hanging up a telephone. It is always the users fault of not paying attention to what they are doing.
Taping with a video camera, red light on and all people still walk around taping without knowing it at the time.

Yes, it's nice to have a red or green light on, but just as with all other things people don't always pay attention.

Depending on how little users know they may even think that light is the general on and off light.

For me a non issue.
 
A

AnalyzeThis

macrumors 6502
Sep 8, 2007
443
1
TV is just a big monitor

I never had the urge to buy Apple LCD monitor before. Why would I want to buy a TV from Apple? Little AppleTV boxes are all I have and all I need to feed my big screen LCD or Plasma monitors which I have no plan to replace for ~10 years.

Looks like way too many folks caught in "buying high" and now it is time to "sell low" to make it a nice Christmas present to themselves. They are dreaming of new product announcement from Apple will let them sell their "priceless" Apple stock positions into temporary frenzy and move on with their lives. Good Luck to those suckers and Marry Christmas everyone!
 
Last edited:
senseless

senseless

macrumors 68000
Apr 23, 2008
1,885
257
Pennsylvania, USA
A nice Apple TV feature would be an internal surround sound amplifier with wireless satellite speakers. That would eliminate a tangled mess of wiring and a remote control.
 
A

AnalyzeThis

macrumors 6502
Sep 8, 2007
443
1
senseless said:
A nice Apple TV feature would be an internal surround sound amplifier with wireless satellite speakers. That would eliminate a tangled mess of wiring and a remote control.
Click to expand...

Does Apple Hi-Fi rings the bell? We all know how this one ended. I still have one (got it on clearance) and use it time-to-time...

I am patiently waiting for Apple Lawn Mower, Coffee Maker and Leather Recliner, all integrated with iTunes though... It's on my Christmas wish list.
 
Last edited:
T

Tussen69

macrumors regular
Jan 7, 2006
137
0
The next Gen Cinema Display

There are defently something Cooking at Apple :)

A simple calculation of Thunderbolt yields

20 Gbits / second
divided by

32 bits / pixel
60 Hertz
equals 10 Mpixel which supports:

16:10 3840 x 2400 WQUXGA
4:3 3648 x 2736

Seems a 46 inch Cinema Display with a resolution if 3840 x 2400 would once again wow the industry with the world first Retina Cinema Display
 
macs4nw

macs4nw

macrumors 601
Sep 21, 2010
4,336
1,933
Next-door from the little old lady from Pasadena..
billnye97 said:
Remember when Apple focused on only a few core platforms and became wildly successful? I really think they might be going a little from the mark with the TV.
Image
Click to expand...

Of course that's when they were APPLE COMPUTER INC, rather than today's APPLE INC. If they can come up with a 'game changer', I say "more 'power' to them", no pun intended. Now there's an idea for a name: "PowerTv" (since they can't have iTv) You're welcome APPLE. :)
 
K

karlwig

macrumors 6502
Mar 7, 2008
313
94
Delegator said:
I agree with all of the above, with (of course) a few caveats. My main TV is a very high end TV that is now 10+ years old. It still has a great picture. During that time I have upgraded my TiVo (original model to Premiere), receiver (went from S-Video to Component...TV doesn't do HDMI), DVD player (to Blu-Ray), added a Roku, added AirPlay via an AirPort express, and implemented whole-house video distribution.

My entertainment center is probably more complicated than the control room of a nuclear power plant with all the wires for power, audio, video, and networking. Not to mention the UPS and connections for my old laptop-now-network-fileserver. So, it would be wonderful if there was a single device that could remove about 80% of that clutter.

But, is that reasonable? Can we expect a single device that will last the 10 years that my TV has so far, and still handle the capabilities that will be expected 5-10 years from now? One thing a 55" TV can't be is disposable.

It would clearly be possible to simplify this mess right now, based on current needs. All you need is the portfolio of content licenses to replace TiVo, Roku, Apple TV, and your cable TV set top boxes with a single unit. That solves most of the problem. But would that solution be upgradeable and expandable enough for future needs? Will 1GB ethernet be enough to handle 4K TV streaming when that comes into being? Will the HDMI interface be upgradable to version N that is required for whatever happens in 5 years? That's a tough question to answer, and that is why, in many respects, separating the big, expensive display from the smarts of the set top box is a good thing.

But maybe Apple will surprise us.
Click to expand...

Very nice analysis. Living room media enjoyment is getting very cluttered indeed, and it wouldn't surprise me if Apple found a way to clean it up somehow.

I have a semi-old Panasonic plasma screen that I wasn't planning on dumping, but I'm sure the new Apple TV will feel as an instant buy once it comes. Apple has a way of making sure I really, really need their new stuff.
 
J

Jsameds

Suspended
Apr 22, 2008
3,525
7,987
It's laughable all these people saying "Why would I replace my TV?".

Think back 10 years. Your phone was perfectly fine - it made calls and texts - it did everything you needed, right? You didn't feel the need for a tablet, why would you, your desktop did all you need. Analogue TV broadcasts were adequate, and your brand new massive 28 inch CRT TV was the bee's knees.

Why would you replace your TV?

Because Apple will make it more than just a TV, God knows what they're cooking up. I personally cannot wait to see what they've got up their sleeves but I'll bet my bottom dollar it will blow people's socks off.
 
Macman45

Macman45

macrumors G5
Jul 29, 2011
13,197
135
Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
As far as an upcoming unveiling is concerned, no chance, but the screen size does make sense. I doubt if Apple would produce anything under 46" and that's the kind of top end market they are going to attempt to target. Trouble is price. My Sony 46" 3D Smart blah blah does it all TV was just under £1000.00 list.

If Apple expect me to even consider replacing it with one of their offerings, and given that I might be prepared to pay a little more because that's the way it is with Apple products, then it's going to have to have all the features I have now, and more...a lot more. I have 2 ATV3's, so even with that technology built into an Apple TV set, what else can they put into the product that isn't already available from top end name brand manufacturers..? I can't see much there apart from some kind of OSX / IOS integration, and I'm not about to pay double the going rate for that alone.
 
Jetson

Jetson

macrumors 6502a
Oct 5, 2003
596
50
Whatever you do don't buy more than one!

Check out what happened when this lady tried to purchase multiple iPhones at an Apple store in New Hampshire. Apple says that she can't have more than 2 and they asked her to leave the store. When she, being Chinese, didn't understand neither the language nor the illogical request ("We don't want your business!?") the tiny 44 year old lady was tackled by 2 huge cops who then, after the tiny lady was slammed to the floor, tasered her. Way to go Apple!!!

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/12/12/woman-taser-iphone-apple/?iid=obnetwork
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom