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

Master-D

macrumors member
Jun 16, 2008
87
3
London, UK
The only true 3D display technology is holographic and I asume Apple has cracked that.[1]

Hell yeah. That's what I'm talking about. In time for Lucas to get the first 3 crapfests out of his system, then we will have a holographic 3D representation of a holographic 2d Leia, or something like that. Sweet.
 

bushido

Suspended
Mar 26, 2008
8,070
2,755
Germany
the biggest question of all ... will it even support hdmi so i can plug in my BLU RAY PLAYER!

i wouldnt be surprised if apple doesnt allow it and will call it "revolutionary and easy to use - no need to plug any hardware in, you can stream everything from the ITUNES STORE" (more money for apple)
 

Dorje Sylas

macrumors 6502a
Jun 8, 2011
524
370
Personally I'm passing on TVs and have gone for a portable projector (700 USD) which gives me almost 100" projection. Why would I even consider going back to a 42" 2000+ dollar thing when $99 gets me the smart box that makes my projector smart?
 

mutantteenager

macrumors 6502
Feb 26, 2006
258
0
$1499? You're smokin dope

It's going to be closer to the $2000 range

Everyone else sells 27 inch computer monitors for $300-$400, Apple sells theirs for a grand due to the "premium features". No one seems to think that's weird here.

I think you're right on pricing, no way an Apple product is going be release in any market with 'competitive pricing'. Their business is premium pricing, hence that massive cash pile.

----------

the biggest question of all ... will it even support hdmi so i can plug in my BLU RAY PLAYER!

i wouldnt be surprised if apple doesnt allow it and will call it "revolutionary and easy to use - no need to plug any hardware in, you can stream everything from the ITUNES STORE" (more money for apple)

Hahaha, you're probably on the nose there! Let's see the 'justifications' on this forum for why that's a good idea when the actual product is launched.
 

AustinIllini

macrumors G5
Oct 20, 2011
12,682
10,517
Austin, TX
I just feel like AppleTV is the best option. TVs don't need to be swapped on a two year cycle as they're just too expensive to buy every two years.
 

d0vr

macrumors 6502a
Feb 24, 2011
603
1
I'm clearly not Apple as I can't think of a single "revolutionary" thing for televisions, especially in the input department. And Siri is not the answer to television input imho.
 

HobeSoundDarryl

macrumors G5
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.

Right, and again, you're highlighting SOFTWARE benefits. If the main pull of an Apple Television is in a baked-in :apple:TV3's software benefits AND there is still an option of a stand-alone :apple:TV3 for around $100, why do we want to buy the Apple Television?

If Apple offered the iOS software experience on ANY mobile smart phone hardware, would we all still ONLY choose the iPhone hardware?

If Apple offered the OSX software experience on ANY computer hardware, would we still ONLY choose Apple computer hardware?

That the big catch here. In this particular case, the exact same software would be available separately from the hardware. The exact same software experience would be available on ANY television- including perhaps the one you already own. And this would not be hacintosh-type stuff: Apple ENDORSES running this software on other company's television hardware.
 

bushido

Suspended
Mar 26, 2008
8,070
2,755
Germany
I'm clearly not Apple as I can't think of a single "revolutionary" thing for televisions, especially in the input department. And Siri is not the answer to television input imho.

in fact i rather hit a button than talk to my tv, i already have voice control on my xbox and i barely use it because i just cant be bothered after a day at work, i just want to chill and NOT talk for a few hours
 

WLS

macrumors 65816
Jul 10, 2008
1,288
110
you know an Apple TV with a camera and video conferencing is the first actual thing that makes sense to me. A TV set with that functionality would probably sell. You could conference with your iPhone directly home..
 

mzelicskovics

macrumors newbie
Jun 15, 2010
3
0
Siri is not going to be a major function in an Apple TV.

Who the hell would want to have to talk to their TV to change the channel or turn up the volume? What about at night when I don't want to wake up my baby? Can I whisper to Siri? I honestly think anyone who thinks a Siri activated TV is a good idea has no clue.
 

zoetmb

macrumors regular
Oct 8, 2007
158
8
$1499, no thanks. I "could" understand $999, but $1499 for a tiny 42" is too much. Should be:

32": $699
42": $999
47": $1299
55": $1799

LED, 120Hz, and 3D for the 47 and 55 inch models.

At first I was going to say that everyone here is under estimating the price of TVs, and they are if you only consider the high-end. But if you consider broad product lines, this is what I found for sizes around 42" for LCD/LED TVs in sales order at J&R, the largest independent retailer in NYC:
1. Sony KDL-40EX523: $739.
2. LG 42LK450: $529.
3. LG 42LK520: $579.
4. Sony KDL-40EX720: $699
5. Samsung LN40D630: $649.
6. Toshiba 40E210U: $470.
7. Sony KDL40BX420: $569.
8. Haier 42": $511
9. Panasonic TC-L42U30: $719.
10. LG42CS570: $700.

Average: $616.40
If you include sets that are sold at Walmart, Costco, Sam'sClub and BJs, prices would probably average lower (along with quality).

Prices do jump considerably once you get to 46" although part of that is because larger sets tend to include more of the high-end lines and have more functionality.

The JVC 47" is $949 and the Sony 46EX720 is $900.

So I think that Apple might have a hard sell even at $1499 unless the set has some substantial unexpected magic to it. And considering the price of a 27" iMac, I actually think it will be priced far higher. One thing that's disturbing to me about the BB survey is that it doesn't mention picture or audio quality nor does it mention connectivity with receivers, etc.
 

AustinIllini

macrumors G5
Oct 20, 2011
12,682
10,517
Austin, TX
in fact i rather hit a button than talk to my tv, i already have voice control on my xbox and i barely use it because i just cant be bothered after a day at work, i just want to chill and NOT talk for a few hours

You would rather flip through a guide than say "Siri, what is showing on Fox at 2:30 AM on Tuesday, November 30th, 2012?"? I guess we can agree to disagree then.
 

RangerOne

macrumors regular
Jan 9, 2009
127
81
California
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. :)

That's the MSRP. Street prices are reasonably discounted (to $1200 in this case, even for this hard-to-find model). Samsung's top-of-the-line 55" 8000-series LED TV has an MSRP of $3,499 but can be had for as little as $1800 online:

http://www.google.com/products/cata...T9qwJK_gsQK_7omvDg&ved=0CG8QxBUwAA#ps-sellers

$1499 would seem to be way too much premium for even an Apple version of a 40" TV. And don't say that their street prices will be much better, because we all know Apple's MAP model doesn't allow that.

I'm waiting for an Apple Television, 55" in size, but if it's more than $2,300 I'll just end up getting a Samsung.
 

KanosWRX

macrumors 6502
Jul 14, 2008
417
396
1499 for a 42 inch tv, are they insane!! just make a 80-100 dollar apple tv 3. I already have 3 HDTV's. I don't want to pay double for another one!
 

mantan

macrumors 68000
Nov 2, 2009
1,743
1,041
DFW
I love the vitriol around this being a Best Buy announcement.

If Apple had done this exact same survey people would have been falling all over themselves saying it was revolutionary and how they couldn't wait to buy it.
 

zoetmb

macrumors regular
Oct 8, 2007
158
8
Surely Apple would chose plasma over LED.

No they wouldn't. They didn't choose plasma for any computer monitor, iPad or phone that they make, why would they choose it for this?

In fact, one of my concerns about an Apple TV is that they'll eliminate most of the color controls and you won't be able to calibrate the set to get the best picture (in the name of simplicity).
 

Tiger8

macrumors 68020
May 23, 2011
2,479
649
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Come on, I know able can charge whatever, and people will still buy it. But when it comes to a tv, apple or not, nobody is gonna pay 1500 dollars for a 42" tv. Come on, my parents won't even pay 700 for a 55". This is one apple product I will not be buying and neither will anybody else.

I hear you, Mr Steve Ballmar, and no one would buy a fully subsidized phone for $599 either
 

Silverbird0000

macrumors 6502a
Sep 19, 2006
582
22
Fort Myers, FL
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.

We are not talking about "decent" TVs. We are talking about high end. You get what you pay for. Not including sales or black Friday, Apple will command a high price.
 

AustinIllini

macrumors G5
Oct 20, 2011
12,682
10,517
Austin, TX
No they wouldn't. They didn't choose plasma for any computer monitor, iPad or phone that they make, why would they choose it for this?

In fact, one of my concerns about an Apple TV is that they'll eliminate most of the color controls and you won't be able to calibrate the set to get the best picture (in the name of simplicity).

Agreed. I would expect Apple to have an LED or OLED screen. If I were Apple, I would take a loss on the initial offering (go big with OLED) and make it up on App sales.
 

ABernardoJr

macrumors 6502
Dec 19, 2006
364
0
Maybe if Siri were part of this supposed Apple TV, in conjunction with some people on here's ideas that they use an iPod Touch or something as a remote, they could enable the voice commands to be spoken to the iPod remotely to the TV instead of having to speak loudly and worry about the ambient noise that naturally come from watching TV. Just a thought, I don't know. lol
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
48
1123.6536.5321
Apple has had a history of premium prices, but I think they will need to be very careful when entering the TV arena, as even with a mock-up such as this one, $1499 for a 42" is quite steep. Not sure if they'll add 3D or not, but you'd expect Siri would be in there somewhere as a feature as well.

Regardless of how accurate this ends up being when the actual product is eventualy released, there will always be people out there who will buy it no matter what the final feature set and no matter what the price, and will probably wait in line for it as well... :p ;)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.