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.
Best Buy Dreams Up a $1499 42-Inch 'Apple HDTV' for Customer Feedback
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Better is the enemy of good enough.
There are plenty of good enough 42" TV's for half the price of the BB price of $1500.
While you can get TV's at the high end (depending on what you mean by high end) for that price (or more); the real question is how big will the market be for a set at they price point. Will it be big enough to make a significant dent on Apple's revenue (and profit margin) or will it just be a hobbyist item like iTV.
It's be a hard upsell to get someone to buy a $1500 set that is looking at a $600 - 800 set; and many people in the $1500 price range will be considering other options, such as a projector as well.
While Apple could make a TV; I doubt that they can turn it into the type of success that the iPhone or iPad have enjoyed; and the slow adoption of iTV shows that many consumers just don't see any value in it. Personally, I think apple should focus on the infrastructure around the TV rather than try to extend their business into TVs.
Actually you can get a pretty decent TV for much less then $1,500 these days. I bought a 55" LG 1080p 120Hz LED for $899 during Black Friday sales. It is not 3D nor does it have any "smart" features, but it is a decent quality display which I can connect my components to with HDMI.
I'm not saying there isn't a market, but would I trade my 55" for a 42" for features that could easily be added by plugging in a $100 box? Not a chance. My room is large enough and I sit far enough back that a 42" would be too small. Maybe others would be fine downsizing and paying hundreds more to get an Apple branded TV, but I wouldn't.
Apple has to be somewhat competive in price and screen size if they want to pay any sort of a big role in the TV business.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/led-tv
A high end Samsung 40'' cost 1,499. You'd get 2 more inches plus Apple features.
It's true that highest end Samsung you've cherry picked retails for $1499. But what you leave out is that the MSRP for televisions is not the price that the vast majority pay for those televisions. That TV is barely available yet, so retail is still high but several hundred dollars below MSRP (already): http://www.leiberts.com/temp/Samsun...lebase&utm_medium=comparsionshopping&aff=5112
The very best rated Samsung 40" that has been out for a while to gauge retail pricing (normalized) is model Samsung LN40D630 which is available for as little as $649 though it's MSRP was much higher.
The point being: it's easy to start cherry picking MSRP's to justify a hypothetical price for an Apple product. But, if that would turn out to be Apple's price, THAT would be the price, probably until the next generation Apple Television is rolled out. I bet hardly anyone pays that $1499 for that Samsung you identified. In fact, I bet within 30-60 days of it being available in lots of retail stores, it's average price will be about $1000.
Furthermore, if THAT Samsung is representative of the quality of 42" we should expect from Apple, and if we can believe that Samsung's MSRP you reference is not THE price that most will pay for it, why not just buy THAT quality Samsung plus $100
TV to get the exact same Apple software experience and save a few hundred dollars?OR, why not buy a bigger HDTV at that high-quality level plus an
TV for about the same as Apple's 42" HDTV with TV built in (plus an apparent requirement for an iPhone or iPad to act as the remote... or main remote)?These are the kinds of issues that make an Apple Television NOT like Apple innovations in computers, music players, phones & tablets. Theoretically, the software that makes each of those innovations special is not necessarily going to be similarly- AND EXCLUSIVELY- available only within this hypothetical television. Thus, the buyers will face paying up for an Apple branded hardware + software combination or paying less (or getting more) with someone else's television + $100
TV3. OR, just spending the $100 and getting the exact same software benefits on the HDTV they already own.3D in the cinema was responsible for a huge amount of revenue last year. I played a few PS3 games in 3D recently and I think it does add to the experience. The only reason I don't have a 3D TV now is because I don't like the glasses. If Apple launched a TV without glasses that delivered 3D I would buy it in a flash. In fact I'm going to buy it in a flash anyway, so they don't need to, but it would be good. Sport, films and games benefit from 3D.
It's more than a trend, it's the future and it's waiting to be perfected. Maybe Apple can do it?
Also, $1,500 doesn't seem too bad to me. I'm not too price sensitive for tech, but realise you can get a much cheaper set. I'm counting on them properly considering the screen, the contrast, blacks, etc. for an improved experience. You get what you pay for. Plus it will no doubt look sweet too, which is important
No, no, no...
We are dumb...but not that dumb. Come on!
ATV for $99 + TV you want...even your current one.
We are dumb...but not that dumb. Come on!
ATV for $99 + TV you want...even your current one.
I dont know about this story, but I do know that Apple is about to turn the TV business on its head. And you know what...Samsung, Google and the rest of them know it too. Thats why they are running around grabbing their nuts as of late.
But I think Apples TV will be affordable, mainly because it will be an iOS device. I know its a TV, but its an iOS device. Apples business model so far points to its Mac line being expensive and its iOS line being affordable. My bet is that they want everyone to have the whole package in terms of iOS. They can do that only if the devices are affordable.
Now what affordable is, thats up to the individual buyer.
But I think Apples TV will be affordable, mainly because it will be an iOS device. I know its a TV, but its an iOS device. Apples business model so far points to its Mac line being expensive and its iOS line being affordable. My bet is that they want everyone to have the whole package in terms of iOS. They can do that only if the devices are affordable.
Now what affordable is, thats up to the individual buyer.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Sorry then,
$1499 42" inch Apple Television*
*(at least) $199 iPod Touch, iPhone or iPad required to act as remote not included
Or, buy someone elses comparable screen plus a $100
TV with all of the EXACT same software benefits.Or, just spend the $100 on the
TV and hook up the exact same software benefits to the HDTV we already own.I hate the idea of combining displays with other technology.
Why? Because display technology tends to last a very long time, while everything else is quickly outdated.
iMacs are stupid for this reason - you can have an amazing 27" LCD screen, but as soon as the computer is outdated what do you do with it? It's not like you are going to update the motherboard and cpu in it.
Keep the storage, processing, networking, and all other equipment SEPARATE.
Second, a $1500 price is way too high. You can pickup a decent Samsung 1080p 42" LED LCD these days for $600 on sale.
Why? Because display technology tends to last a very long time, while everything else is quickly outdated.
iMacs are stupid for this reason - you can have an amazing 27" LCD screen, but as soon as the computer is outdated what do you do with it? It's not like you are going to update the motherboard and cpu in it.
Keep the storage, processing, networking, and all other equipment SEPARATE.
Second, a $1500 price is way too high. You can pickup a decent Samsung 1080p 42" LED LCD these days for $600 on sale.
Have we really sunk to this level... Best Buy spews some of the most unimaginative, simple-minded iDiarrhea ever conceived and you guys can't lap it up fast enough? Pitiful.
Because they can sell Best Buy insurance/repair plans that no one will cash in on. Then they can also try to sell you on the "cheaper" knock off which they get a big profit cut on.
The same is rarely true for Apple products.
That said, this is a fiction perhaps made up by Best Buy, or perhaps made up by the company that runs their surveys. We don't actually know yet that Apple is even making a tv set, just another black box, or perhaps the black box and eventually a new larger cinema display with HDMI etc inputs
----------
If they were going to do that then why not just keep it to the little black box and you use whatever tv you want.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I just went to Amazon.com, pulled up all HDTVs 40-44", sorted by price "high to low". Of 304 total models in that list, 14 were priced at $1499 or higher (at Amazon). Apparently, you would argue that only those 14 are not crap televisions. I suspect that many of the other 290 sets are excellent quality HDTVs too.
And Amazon is not necessarily the low-price leader for television buyers (I bet several of those 14 could be found for <$1499 with a little shopping on other sites).
Last edited:
Oh Boy!, Apple is going to reinvent the TV . . .
Wasted effort if it is indeed just a TV.
Many of the younger audiences these days don't watch TV as it used to be.
Time shifting, select programming without ads, everything happens on their computers. Work, chat etc. , TV watching on the side of the screen.
So, they'd have to bring that computer experience to the screen, i.e. more screen real estate.
Don't think I'd be watching a 42" or anything across a room to work, although I can see skyping, facetime etc. on it.
My guess is that Apple tried to change the distribution model and was unsuccessful to get the providers to agree.
I'm not sure why BB is using this "example" as it definitely didn't come from Apple.
What does this gain you over your current HDTV and a $99 Apple TV box? Literally nothing.
Playing apps on your TV? already can do it via Airplay mirroring, but playing Angry birds on the TV sucks because it is just mirrored, so you have to look at your iPad/4S screen anyways to see what you are doing.
If Apple comes out with a TV it will not just be to join a crowded market with another smart tv competitor, it will be there to flip the market on its head.
Siri, FaceTime, Apps and a new kind of TV service that lets you watch the shows that you want, when you want, rather than the current "all you can eat" buffet style cable providers. Less content, but better quality content. Voice control that works no matter what input you are on (video overlays).
Also, not $1499. $999 for 42". Not to compete with the cheap $299 black friday special TV's, but one that will rid you of your cable service and save you money in the long run.
That is just my guess
What does this gain you over your current HDTV and a $99 Apple TV box? Literally nothing.
Playing apps on your TV? already can do it via Airplay mirroring, but playing Angry birds on the TV sucks because it is just mirrored, so you have to look at your iPad/4S screen anyways to see what you are doing.
If Apple comes out with a TV it will not just be to join a crowded market with another smart tv competitor, it will be there to flip the market on its head.
Siri, FaceTime, Apps and a new kind of TV service that lets you watch the shows that you want, when you want, rather than the current "all you can eat" buffet style cable providers. Less content, but better quality content. Voice control that works no matter what input you are on (video overlays).
Also, not $1499. $999 for 42". Not to compete with the cheap $299 black friday special TV's, but one that will rid you of your cable service and save you money in the long run.
That is just my guess
...
Or, just spend the $100 on the
Bingo. As long as this remains a choice, I'm interested. I have a Samsung 46" 120Hz TV that was considerably cheaper than the quoted $1499, by at least two to three hundred dollars, and it's even "smart" (i.e. Internet-connected with Hulu, Netflix etc.). Downside? Not LED, but for me that's not really a hindrance. My
tv works a charm on it as it is, and its UI is much easier to navigate than Samsung's.If there is no add-on choice on the next iteration of
tv, I most likely won't be upgrading. (I might get a Mac mini to replace it, though.)
Actually it's not. When it is well done 3d can be very useful.
The trouble is that outside of animation, it hasn't been well done. It must be filmed to 3d from the start or it looks like crap. And there has to be plenty of time taken to render it fully or it looks like crap.
Compare the 3d which was well done in Avatar to the very much totally wrongly done post 3d in The Last Airbender to see the difference. James filmed for it, took as long as it needed in post and did it to enhance the extremely heavy use of CGI (which can look flat). M Night however filmed in 2d, rushed it in post and did it as a trick to look cool.
Except for the fact that a similarly specced dell monitor (Ultrasharp 27", same resolution, similar IPS panel) will run you $850 from Amazon.
The Thunderbolt display is hardly overpriced as there aren't many actual competitors that have the color accuracy and resolution. Sure, you can get a 1080P 27" for $300, but it is not even close to the same class as the Dell or Apple monitors.
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/led-tv
A high end Samsung 40'' cost 1,499. You'd get 2 more inches plus Apple features.
I bought one of Samsung's 'Smart TVs" this year. It can do everything in that list other than renting movies from iTunes, and that is most likely Apple not granting them a license to do so. I expect this years crop of TVs and next years crop, etc to further integrate the functions of a computer into the HDTVs.
Apple will need to hit a home run here and change the game much like they did with the iPhone's touch interface. That list from Best Buy is nothing more than a 'ME TOO" list of TV features.
Not for $1500
I can get a Sony 46" for $700. Add an Apple TV and it's $800. That's roughly half of the suggested price point.
I can get a Sony 46" for $700. Add an Apple TV and it's $800. That's roughly half of the suggested price point.
