Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs Told Employees in 2010 That Apple Would Not Release a Television
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I never understood why so many people expected an Apple made tv set.
For me it's just a plain monitor nothing but screen. The important thing is the "smart" part that puts the content and control to it.
And bundling that with fixed hardware is the dumbest idea ever. My 1 year old Samsung with "SmartHub" is already looking outdated like a website from 1996 and i never really used it. The processor is slow and i'll surely not be able to upgrade that builtin device.
Even though i got amazon instant video app on it which plainly refuses to play anything on that horrible UI with a ******** remote where i need turn on the flashlight of my iphone so i can find the buttons to navigate in dimmed light.
For me it's just a plain monitor nothing but screen. The important thing is the "smart" part that puts the content and control to it.
And bundling that with fixed hardware is the dumbest idea ever. My 1 year old Samsung with "SmartHub" is already looking outdated like a website from 1996 and i never really used it. The processor is slow and i'll surely not be able to upgrade that builtin device.
Even though i got amazon instant video app on it which plainly refuses to play anything on that horrible UI with a ******** remote where i need turn on the flashlight of my iphone so i can find the buttons to navigate in dimmed light.
I believe Steve!
I don't believe Apple will release a TV set. By a TV set I mean a TV screen with associated electronics (like today's smart TVs). The problem is, a large screen TV is an investment that is only replaced when it's broken, with hardly any profit margin in it. Most people buy the largest TV set they can afford, so with an Apple branded TV this likely means having to sacrifice screen size to account for the likely higher price an Apple offering would be. I honestly think the best way to go is a dumb TV (big screen with no smart features), then low cost set-top box that has all the 'smart TV' features. This is where Apple TV currently sits, which is where Apple will build from. People are far more likely to keep their massive screen TV, and upgrade their set top box more regularly if they can offer new and more compelling features to compliment their TV experience. What Apple TV really needs to offer is content, and a great user experience - which is where Apple have some leverage. The big question that remains is whether the content providers will come to an agreement with Apple over distribution of their content via the iTunes store.
I don't believe Apple will release a TV set. By a TV set I mean a TV screen with associated electronics (like today's smart TVs). The problem is, a large screen TV is an investment that is only replaced when it's broken, with hardly any profit margin in it. Most people buy the largest TV set they can afford, so with an Apple branded TV this likely means having to sacrifice screen size to account for the likely higher price an Apple offering would be. I honestly think the best way to go is a dumb TV (big screen with no smart features), then low cost set-top box that has all the 'smart TV' features. This is where Apple TV currently sits, which is where Apple will build from. People are far more likely to keep their massive screen TV, and upgrade their set top box more regularly if they can offer new and more compelling features to compliment their TV experience. What Apple TV really needs to offer is content, and a great user experience - which is where Apple have some leverage. The big question that remains is whether the content providers will come to an agreement with Apple over distribution of their content via the iTunes store.
So why not find something better to do like go outside and enjoy the fresh air, rather than sit there and tell people they can't spell?
My Panasonic Smart Viera works great, has backlit keypad on the remote, and runs my Netflix fine, I just use my computer or laptop or whatever to change my Netflix region through UnblockUS and get tons and tons of content
Works great.I remember reading these forums the summer before the iPhone launch.. numerous mockups, speculation as to what the phone would look like, if there was even going to be a phone.
The industry was turned upside down when it was revealed.
Just slapping the iTV board in a flat screen and selling it.. I don't see that as a revolutionary advance.
But it's clear they're interested in that space.. and Tim Cook having said not long ago that iTV is now considerably more than a "hobby" suggests we can expect to see further development in that area.
But Steve having said once that they were "never" going to do something is no real indication of anything.
He was renowned for saying ideas sucked initially, then being convinced otherwise.
The industry was turned upside down when it was revealed.
Just slapping the iTV board in a flat screen and selling it.. I don't see that as a revolutionary advance.
But it's clear they're interested in that space.. and Tim Cook having said not long ago that iTV is now considerably more than a "hobby" suggests we can expect to see further development in that area.
But Steve having said once that they were "never" going to do something is no real indication of anything.
He was renowned for saying ideas sucked initially, then being convinced otherwise.
But that isn't what he said. This is brilliant. Why is it that when we are talking Apple people spin things to make them sound favourable?
He said: 'Anything below 10" was not right'.
So you've spun that to mean what you want it to mean?
Who cares what Steve once said? How many times did he say Apple wasn't going to do something and then they did it?
Once you get to $170 billion in revenues a $99 hockey puck doesn't really move the needle. Maybe it would if more people purchased it and there was a reason to upgrade every few years like with phones/computers. But how often do people replace their cable boxes/DVRs?
Once you get to $170 billion in revenues a $99 hockey puck doesn't really move the needle. Maybe it would if more people purchased it and there was a reason to upgrade every few years like with phones/computers. But how often do people replace their cable boxes/DVRs?
Paying cable companies big bucks for what amounts to 4-5 good channels is lame and that's why so many people are ditching it. They MUST come up with an ala carte system instead of your monthly bill just being an on/off switch. You may be OK handing them a ton of money each month but most aren't. I want the capability to choose the channels I want to pay for and that's it. Just like a buffet at a restaurant or whatever. If I want a burger I don't want to be told I have to pay for the chicken sandwich and tofu too even though I won't eat either one. Same idea here.
The good news is that we've been cable free for over five years now and have saved thousands of dollars. Between netflix, hulu plus, and my roof antenna we have enough to watch and the total monthly cost is around $20 bucks instead of over a hundred.
I'm all for Apple or anyone else putting the squeeze on these damn cable companies and their BS. And, while they are at it, let's get some other internet options out there too.
This whole TV rumor never made sense to me from the beginning. If anything, they should work on improving and adding features to the small box Apple TV. That could sell really well if they add something like an App Store and possibly add more channels.
I see reading comprehension is an issue here. Lets break this down piece by piece to make it easier for you to understand.
"Commenting on avalanche of tablets heading to market. Just a handful of credible entrants."
Here Jobs clearly introduces that he is talking about the 'credible' high-performance tablets that were actually on or near the market at that time. Note that he is not talking about products that are in development, or in the distant future.
"Almost all use 7" screen, compared to iPad at nearly 10" screen. 7" screen is only 45% as large as iPad's screen."
Clearly Jobs is focused on the deficiencies of SEVEN INCH screens. He says that number over and over. You should be able to grasp this. He has a problem with screens that are "45% as large as the iPad" which isn't remotely like an iPad mini which is much larger.
"Hold an iPad in portrait view and draw a horizontal line halfway down. What's left is a 7" screen...too small."
Again he is obsessed with the failures of SEVEN INCH tablets. He says it again.
"There are clear limits to how close elements can be on the screen before users can't touch accurately."
Quite true. 7" tablets have failed miserably. While they may be worshipped at the Church of Marketshare, one of them has ever been sold at a profit which means consumers don't value them. Many of them, such as those made by Microsoft and BB, have lost their companies BILLIONS. Jobs was 100% correct about the SEVEN INCH market.
"We believe 10-inch screen is minimum necessary."
Now this is the one statement that people like you love to take out of context. You do realize the original iPad itself was 9.7", right? Do you really think Jobs was saying that the original iPad was too small? Or that 9.6" or 9.5" is too small? As he said over and over, he was talking about the market of 2010 where your choices were ~10" or ~7". At no point did he say "I've prototyped an 8" devices and it sucks" nor had he used one from his competitors as they weren't selling any in volume. His main point was to tell the foolish analysts in the crowd that they were dead wrong about the market potential of 7" tablets, and he was right. Taking his comments out of context to mean that Apple would never go even slightly below 10" is ridiculous.
Id say ours is adequate at best - the Netflix experience on an AppleTV is far better: faster, more logical layout, updated on occasion, alphanum based entry on an iOS device is an order-of-magnitude more effective vs. cursor based input.
The other thing is consistency. The Panny Plasma in the main TV and the Sony in our bedroom, both with ATVs, work the same way when it comes to Netflix (and of course, streaming from our local library, music, etc.)
When we went wall/mantle mount a couple of month ago, I didnt even bother to reconnect the ethernet.
Anyway, the point being: a well executed, consistent, often upgraded TV experience is superior, and I have yet to see that in any smart TVs, though I suppose the current Samsung product with their modular smarts, if used throughout a house would provide much of the same.
Now _that_ is a good suggestion, in fact, chairs and longboard are already in the beach vehicle
Check this out
Attachments
Oh, so he was saying the iPad's 9.7" screen was wrong? Of course not. To understand the quote you need the context. If you wan't to talk about spin, taking words out of context is the definition of spin. See above for the full context.
I would say that's a good question. Even if only half of that is TV then you are talking almost $1k/year for something that you feel is not all that useful.
At this point, there's no real reason for TVs even. An AppleTV could be a set top box that you plug all your gaming devices, cable box, DVD player, etc. into, and it can feed out to any "dumb" screen (monitor, TV, projector) plus sound output it wants. The AppleTV would be the "brain" of the system, rather than having all these controls and such built into a TV. I don't need speakers, Netflix, and Google built into my TV, it just needs to be a screen.
Let's reanimate his corpse (or his burnt Buddhist ashes?) and then ask Zombie Steve Jobs if he changed his mind on prior statements.
Interviewer: "Prior to your death, you stated flatly that Apple would never make a TV set. Is this still your position, Mr. Jobs?"
Zombie Steve: "brainnnnsssss .."
Interviewer: "Aaaarrggh!!! Let go of .my .neck!! Yaiigghggh!!!"
Interviewer: "Prior to your death, you stated flatly that Apple would never make a TV set. Is this still your position, Mr. Jobs?"
Zombie Steve: "brainnnnsssss .."
Interviewer: "Aaaarrggh!!! Let go of .my .neck!! Yaiigghggh!!!"
The internet was designed to be a distributed technology individual players attach stuff to to increase the network effect. Internet is delivered to the "last mile" by cable, phone line, cellular radio, and even microwave. The individual providers do not "need to be broken". Some have layered other services onto their pipe, such as TV (analog and digital) and phone along with pure internet (IP). Along with that layering is content delivery which they contract and pay to have access to. That does not need to be broken either.
A local sports club called the LA Dodgers entered into an exclusive arrangement with a cable company to deliver the games. That leaves out not only free TV but all the other means people get TV signals.
It's a "free market".
Considerable capital (tens of billions per year) were invested to build those pipes so they could monitize it not only with pure internet access, but content metering through monthly and PPV charges. Those investments are property rights now. If you want a better option, build it. Steve made a phone that was better, but he still had to distribute it through the "byzantine" channel of cell phone companies because they own the pipes. The same nut exists with TV. Apple can make a better device with better UI but it cannot get the pipes. Google is building pipes. Made of fiber.
Rocketman
Last edited:
It's not just that he said no, but WHY. The margin on screens suck. And more importantly, once someone buys a screen, they stay with it until it dies (usually). That's both bad from a sales standpoint, and it's bad for product development (if you come up with some really neat improvements a year later, it almost doesn't care how neat they are, people probably won't buy). Plus, if you're talking really big screen, the logistics get tough too.
The magic is in the boxes connected to the screen. And it's a lot easier to convince someone to replace a small box for new features that runs a couple hundred than the screen.
The magic is in the boxes connected to the screen. And it's a lot easier to convince someone to replace a small box for new features that runs a couple hundred than the screen.
Which is pretty much what I'm expecting to happen with the next iteration, which would get me to buy one.
Well, they haven't released a 7" iPad. The iPad mini is significantly larger than the 7" Android tablets he was bashing (about 43% because it is 4x3 and not 16x9).
Jobs' analysis is right. People don't replace TVs that often and the margins are terrible. That's also why there won't be an iCar. Accessories, yes. But not the full product. Think about it. Apple wants to reduce its reliance on Samsung. Are they really going to start buying 55" panels from them en masse?