Brightcove CEO Envisions His Dream Apple Television and Set-Top Box

I fail to see why apple would release both a TV and Set top box, surely if they are releasing a 2 grand TV they will want people to buy it instead of a $200 box connected to another brands TV (especially if is samsung). From what I understand apple make very little from content and are all about the hardware with a big mark up, to me the full TV sounds like a no brainer

mediaboy said:

The most amazing addition would be wireless IR sensors to put on other devices (Blu-Ray Player, DVR, Stereo, etc) so that your AppleTV could control all the devices using an iPad Mini.

I have the Harmony 1100 now, but the interface is lacking, the sensors are all wired. Leaves major room for improvement.

That would make it complete IMHO.

Click to expand...

bretm said:

Not in a million years.

Click to expand...

Or, you know, already taken care of.

http://www.iruleathome.com/

http://www.globalcache.com/products/itach/

It'd be cool if Apple had their own TV, receiver, etc. and they all had wifi built in, saw each other automatically, and let you build your own custom interface. It's kind of like what the above is, except the functionality is already built in and simplified. Some manufacturers are half-way there (Pioneer's apps for the iPad aren't half bad) but they always only get you half way there.

BornAgainApple said:

Sigh, I must be getting old, because CRT's back in the day lasted 20-30 years. Still got a 13" Trinitron for the elliptical in the basement.

Click to expand...

you may have been using them that long, but they didnt keep good geometry or sharpness for that long. my CRT HD Trinitron started getting bruised spots onscreen after just a couple years.

Stupid...

My setup consists of:
Apple TV3 hooked into my existing flatscreen.

This links wirelessly to my MacMini which has iTunes sharing enabled.
Connected to The Mac Mini is a 9TB RAID to which I am ripping all of my DVDs
The Mac Mini also acts as a Print Share, VPN server, Web Server, DNS, DHCP and we have mobile home directories enabled so our laptops are automatically backed up to a 2TB Mirrored RAID set, all of this running under OSX 10.6 Server.

If I wanted I could add an elgato eyeTV to the mix for capturing off the air TV too.

The only Change I want is with Apple TV and how it handles TV series, they need to be more hierarchal like iTunes is, so that when I look at say "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" that is what I see and when I open that I see series 1,2,3....etc as opposed to currently it shows "Buffy... series 1", Buffy....series2"....etc etc etc.

pgiguere1 said:

People who would buy an Apple TV are probably richer than the average person and have a bigger house. What I meant is that Apple makes premium devices so they don't necessarily have to have the average person in mind. Macs are all over $1k

Click to expand...

youre high. the entry-level Mac is $599.

ipads are $329.

ipods are $50.

iphones are $0.

...and yes, apple DOES have the average person in mind when designing its products -- thats why theyre so damn popular.

chirpie said:

Or, you know, already taken care of.

http://www.iruleathome.com/

http://www.globalcache.com/products/itach/

It'd be cool if Apple had their own TV, receiver, etc. and they all had wifi built in, saw each other automatically, and let you build your own custom interface. It's kind of like what the above is, except the functionality is already built in and simplified. Some manufacturers are half-way there (Pioneer's apps for the iPad aren't half bad) but they always only get you half way there.

Click to expand...

Still have wired IR sensors which makes a mess in the closet. Maybe I'm really just looking for devices that can be controlled through WIFI like the Apple TV.

An example is the wireless sensors that I have for my alarm system. Simple and clean.

Mykbibby said:

Maybe your needs lend themselves to a small bedroom-sized screen, but I and almost everyone I know wouldn't buy it at a screen size less than 55. Size matters.

Click to expand...

and people like me would buy one if it werent smaller than 55" -- due to limitations on space in my living room. as you say, size matters.

mediaboy said:

Still have wired IR sensors which makes a mess in the closet. Maybe I'm really just looking for devices that can be controlled through WIFI like the Apple TV.

An example is the wireless sensors that I have for my alarm system. Simple and clean.

Click to expand...

Yeah, IR doesn't work the way you describe. All IR remote control is effectively line of sight. But many higher quality components have the IR trigger in the back (12v input you plug into using basically a tiny 1/8 headphone jack cable) and work great, without the added mess of the IR being on the front of the component and adds very little mess to the back.

Also, many new devices and TVs have either wireless built in or have ethernet jacks that can also be attached to a network, many of which can be controlled via software like the previously linked device. This is where the future is, and it's still kind of buggy, but it's here in it's infancy.

m11rphy said:

I fail to see why apple would release both a TV and Set top box, surely if they are releasing a 2 grand TV they will want people to buy it instead of a $200 box connected to another brands TV (especially if is samsung). From what I understand apple make very little from content and are all about the hardware with a big mark up, to me the full TV sounds like a no brainer

Click to expand...

If you have recently bought another brand's TV, you are out of the market for Apple's TV, but you are still a potential customer for the set top box.

It's sort of like offering both the iPod Touch and the iPhone. The iPod Touch gives you most of the features of the iPhone, but at a lower price (when you consider the contract as part of the price).

Like the iPod touch, the set-top box will have not quite all of the features of the full TV. If you want the full Apple TV experience, you'll get the Apple TV. If you want an entry-level addition to your current system, you'll get the set-top box.

Of course, I don't know what Apple will actually release (if anything). Chances are, we'll compare it to our wildest dreams, and find it lacking, and we'll blame Apple if the TV doesn't also make popcorn and do our laundry.

Personally, I don't want a set-top box. I want a TV that frees me from most of the other set-top boxes I already have.

justperry said:

No way, Apple is all about streaming content, they won't go anything bigger than needed, 8-16 GB Max.

Click to expand...

But what about DVR? My comcast box has a 250 GB drive in it. Apple could easily and cheaply put 500GB in there



What I want from this Apple TV is an internet enabled TV, MAYBE with a separate box, and have the same experience I do with my current TV, but better, more polished, and netflix included. Have it still use my comcast channels.

chirpie said:

Yeah, IR doesn't work the way you describe. All IR remote control is effectively line of sight. But many higher quality components have the IR trigger in the back (12v input you plug into using basically a tiny 1/8 headphone jack cable) and work great, without the added mess of the IR being on the front of the component and adds very little mess to the back.

Also, many new devices and TVs have either wireless built in or have ethernet jacks that can also be attached to a network, many of which can be controlled via software like the previously linked device. This is where the future is, and it's still kind of buggy, but it's here in it's infancy.

Click to expand...

I think he means IR blasters for controlling components that are out of the line of sight.

APlotdevice said:

I think he means IR blasters for controlling components that are out of the line of sight.

Click to expand...

Yeah, in that case, I think it's a crap shoot. IR extenders are the devil and are still technically wired at the end of the chain.

I get sucked into this speculation

Apple is in talks with rights holders. Trying to nail down enough network content and movies (and video podcasts and other independently-produced content), then figure out what to do about the picture that would be as revelatory as Retina Displays. 2-4K? A translucent screen on which the picture suddenly materializes? I think this hypothesis is likely. First try to solidify the Apple TV. For $199. What do you think Apple is, a discount house? This would largely be a content play. How to allow as much or as little TV watching as you want. Literally on-demand streaming. Otherwise, pick up on-air with antenna. Best hi-def picture you'll see, over air.

Notice somebody missing? The cables, that boring business that gave the country good reception of more crap. They make you pay for 400 channels all the time when you might watch 30 shows a week if you're an addict.

And next, a better picture than you can see anywhere else. That's when it's time to build an Apple TV set. In other words, unless one of those prototypes in the Apple Labs makes you go, "Oh, my God!" when you see it, I don't think Apple should bring out a "set."

APlotdevice said:

I think that's supposed to be for inputting a cable/antenna signal.

Click to expand...

That's in essence what I said. Cable or antenna signals are traditionally run through a coaxial
(coax) cable.

brasskey said:

That's in essence what I said. Cable or antenna signals are traditionally run through a coaxial
(coax) cable.

Click to expand...

Ah. I thought you were talking about outputs rather than inputs.

justperry said:

No way, Apple is all about streaming content, they won't go anything bigger than needed, 8-16 GB Max.

Click to expand...

Which is why it will never take off. I have an LG Smart TV. The apps suck but Netflix and being able to just plug in an HDD with movies on it Rocks! I Love how it converts 2D to 3D. Apple would have to come out with something pretty special for me to trade in my LG.
I also own an ATV2 and don't even use it.
I have a TON of shows on my PVR and the kids record EVERYTHING! Even that fat kid show Honey Boo Boo. I’m forever deleting stuff.

I doubt an Apple Television will be anything mentioned by Jeremy Allaire.

Apple is about simplicity. The Apple Television will be a 100% wireless device.

The Apple Television will simply be a big screen to hang on the wall. Just like hanging a picture frame. No cables, no wires, no connectors. It will be 100% wireless - even the power.

From July 2011 - Apple's Interest in WiTricity Wireless Charging
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/11/apples-interest-in-witricity-wireless-charging/

It will pull data from the iTunes Cloud or your own Mac/iOS device. But it will have zero connectors on it. No ports, no HDMI, no Thunderbolt, no nothin'. It will simply be the largest screen in the house you can blast anything you want to from any of your Apple products - in HD. There will be zero configuration. Power will use the wireless electricity charging by WiTricity so there will be no need for even a power cord.

I think this is why it is taking Apple so long to bring a television to market.

It's going to change everything.

doelcm82 said:

If you have recently bought another brand's TV, you are out of the market for Apple's TV, but you are still a potential customer for the set top box.

It's sort of like offering both the iPod Touch and the iPhone. The iPod Touch gives you most of the features of the iPhone, but at a lower price (when you consider the contract as part of the price).

Like the iPod touch, the set-top box will have not quite all of the features of the full TV. If you want the full Apple TV experience, you'll get the Apple TV. If you want an entry-level addition to your current system, you'll get the set-top box.

Of course, I don't know what Apple will actually release (if anything). Chances are, we'll compare it to our wildest dreams, and find it lacking, and we'll blame Apple if the TV doesn't also make popcorn and do our laundry.

Personally, I don't want a set-top box. I want a TV that frees me from most of the other set-top boxes I already have.

Click to expand...

But an iPod touch is half the price of an iPhone, however the set top box would be a 10th the cost of the fullTV. Thats a lot of money they would be giving up. Also it might just be people with existing TV's buying the STB people might decide to buy it and a new samsung TV for a much cheaper combined price

coolant113 said:

I agree with almost everything he envisions except for one thing. That putting "1tb to 3tb" of storage either in the set top box or the tv itself. Why would apple do that? They have been on a mission to move everything into the cloud. The first generation Apple TV had a lot of onboard storage, then they introduced the 2nd and 3rd generation Apple TV that was only designed to work off the "cloud". I really don't think apple will go backwards and put that much onboard storage into one of these future devices. They will mend this into the "cloud".

Click to expand...

Because the "Cloud" can't store my 6TB of data. At least not without charging me. No thanks. Then to upload then Download it to your TV? My ISP charges me a lot if I go over.

skellener said:

I doubt an Apple Television will be anything mentioned by Jeremy Allaire.

Apple is about simplicity. The Apple Television will be a 100% wireless device.

The Apple Television will simply be a big screen to hang on the wall. Just like hanging a picture frame. No cables, no wires, no connectors. It will be 100% wireless - even the power.

From July 2011 - Apple's Interest in WiTricity Wireless Charging
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/11/apples-interest-in-witricity-wireless-charging/

It will pull data from the iTunes Cloud or your own Mac/iOS device. But it will have zero connectors on it. No ports, no HDMI, no Thunderbolt, no nothin'. It will simply be the largest screen in the house you can blast anything you want to from any of your Apple products - in HD. There will be zero configuration. Power will use the wireless electricity charging by WiTricity so there will be no need for even a power cord.

I think this is why it is taking Apple so long to bring a television to market.

It's going to change everything.

Click to expand...

For this to possibly work Apple would need to hire an army of technicians to go into people's homes and install these wireless magnetic devices into their ceilings.

I'll take 4! One for the living room, my man cave basement and my sexy twin daughters

m11rphy said:

But an iPod touch is half the price of an iPhone, however the set top box would be a 10th the cost of the fullTV. Thats a lot of money they would be giving up. Also it might just be people with existing TV's buying the STB people might decide to buy it and a new samsung TV for a much cheaper combined price

Click to expand...

But without the STB available, those people might simply buy the cheaper Samsung and not buy any Apple product at all. How does that help Apple?

skellener said:

I doubt an Apple Television will be anything mentioned by Jeremy Allaire.

Apple is about simplicity. The Apple Television will be a 100% wireless device.

The Apple Television will simply be a big screen to hang on the wall. Just like hanging a picture frame. No cables, no wires, no connectors. It will be 100% wireless - even the power.

From July 2011 - Apple's Interest in WiTricity Wireless Charging
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/11/apples-interest-in-witricity-wireless-charging/

It will pull data from the iTunes Cloud or your own Mac/iOS device. But it will have zero connectors on it. No ports, no HDMI, no Thunderbolt, no nothin'. It will simply be the largest screen in the house you can blast anything you want to from any of your Apple products - in HD. There will be zero configuration. Power will use the wireless electricity charging by WiTricity so there will be no need for even a power cord.

I think this is why it is taking Apple so long to bring a television to market.

It's going to change everything.

Click to expand...

That sounds really great. Ping me when the clinical trials have ended. Oh, and let me know when Apple has successfully untangled all of the various licensing and distribution deals between the networks and providers.

Sounds more like something we should expect in 10 years, not one or two.

IMO Apple should stick with an attached Apple TV box, like they have now but with expanded abilities. It would allow consumers an easy upgrade option and would suit millions of users not wanting/needing to replace their existing TV.

mdelvecchio said:

you may have been using them that long, but they didnt keep good geometry or sharpness for that long. my CRT HD Trinitron started getting bruised spots onscreen after just a couple years.

Click to expand...

Mine is just a 'few' years older than that. Does yours have rotary dials? And I haven't really noticed any visible issues with the screen, though one probably wouldn't notice such issues on a 13" from six feet away. It's turned on 3-4 times a week. Great little set, though the OTA HD programming looks horrible.