Apple Television Set Rumors Revived, To Launch in 2011?

[MacRumors]

DailyTech revives a long running rumor that Apple may be getting into the TV set business. (via 9to5mac) These rumors have been running for years with previous claims even specifying that Apple would release 42" and 50" Plasmas displays for sale in Apple Stores. Both Apple's Steve Jobs and Tim Cook have dismissed the possibility of an Apple TV set before. In 2010, Cook responded to questions about the Apple TV set top box at a Goldman Sachs Conference:

Q: Where do you see things going with the Apple TV?
A: It's still a hobby, but our gut tells us there's something there. The go-to-market model is difficult, and we have no interest in being in the TV market. But we have continued to invest in the Apple TV and will keep doing so.

According to DailyTech, a "former Apple executive" has revealed that the company has entered into a partnership with an unnamed consumer electronics manufacturer to build Apple-branded television sets that will come with Apple TV and iTunes functionalities built directly into the television set.

According to source Apple plans to "blow Netflix and all those other guys away" by bundling Apple TV + iTunes inside physical television sets. According to the source Apple is teaming up with a major supplier (our guess would be Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (SEO:005930)), to provide the physical televisions, which will be rebranded as Apple television sets.

While the televisions would be manufactured by the partner company, they would be branded and marketed as Apple products. Apple is understood to be shooting for a fall release, although the debut may slip into early next year.

Apple's own Apple TV set top box has seen limited success since its launch with Apple describing the entire business as a "hobby". Selling an all-in-one solution could address one of the hurdles that Steve Jobs discussed when talking about Google's entry into the same market:

"Subsidized set-top boxes have squashed innovation because no one wants to pay for separate boxes...ask TiVo, Roku, us, Google in a few months. The set-top box needs to be torn up and redesigned to get people things they way they want them.

DailyTech hasn't been a recent source of Apple-related rumors, so it's hard to gauge their accuracy on the topic.

Article Link: Apple Television Set Rumors Revived, To Launch in 2011?

 

[wordoflife]

42 inch TV: Just $6999.

Jokes aside, I think Apple has the capability of producing some very nice TV sets (quality wise) as well as implementing a lot of features like built in WiFi ... hell, just throwing an Apple TV into that in general.

 

[mrgraff]

Launch in 2011? I can't wait

 

[*LTD*]

Game-changer.

But that's a little early.

 

[42streetsdown]

i'd rather have more TV functionality on my iMac

 

[appleguy123]

I wouldn't want to buy a 2,000$ tv every time some new software feature I want comes out. That's the main reason I like the set top box idea.

 

[important]

So let me get this straight - Apple can "barely" (by iOS device standards) sell the $99 Apple TV, but they are going to roll out actual TVs?

Not happening. Just keep adding features (*cough* apps *cough*) to the $99 ATV and they'll move.

 

[Piggie]

I could understand, and think it would be a great idea to build the AppleTV functionality into TV's

TV's which already do other things.

But I'm not sure making an AppleTV "ONLY" TV would be a good thing, as it will be compared to other, what people are calling "Smart TV's" which can and will do a whole lot more.

So, yes, Add AppleTV into TV's, but don't make TV's which only offer Apple TV and nothing else.
Otherwise you may as well get a all singing all dancing TV and plug an AppleTV into it, and get the best of both worlds.

 

[Oletros]

"blow Netflix and all those other guys away" by bundling Apple TV + iTunes inside physical television sets"

Yes, nothing can blow away Netflix and all those guys than a very expensive TV with iTunes integrated.


Oh, yes, is game changing. It's more convenient than having a TV + an Apple TV

 

[smakus]

Samsung? Doubt it.

Samsung has their own app store built into their televisions, complete with Netflix app, etc.

For them to completely abandon that in favor of an Apple pairing... well, it just seems unlikely.

Apple selling televisions doesn't exactly sound likely either. And the only way Apple is going to put a dent in Netflix's progress over the last couple years is to offer all-you-can-eat subscriptions through iTunes. That won't happen. A lot of this stuff blowing in the wind is likely bunk.

 

[125037]

Hallelujer!! Finally!

 

[esquared]

No sense

So let me get this straight - Apple can "barely" (by iOS device standards) sell the $99 Apple TV, but they are going to roll out actual TVs?

Not happening.

Agreed, makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[donny77]

Module

What I'd like to see is a standard expansion module on the back of the TV. Then you could insert an Apple TV, Roku, Direct TV, TIVO, or Cable box unit into the slot. the Width and connector would be standard and it would add whatever functionality. This allows one to upgrade their Apple TV, without replacing a perfectly fine TV.

 

[radiogoober]

lol why would Apple want to "blow out Netflix"? Netflix is on the current AppleTV (and it rocks!)

 

[Arcus]

Blow Netflix away? Lets see, all I can eat streaming and as many DVDs as I can watch , mail and watch for $9.00 a month. Ya, good luck with beating that.

 

[streetkid]

Can't see the love between Samsung and apple to be honest, given their to and fro court battles?

 

[gt1948]

Apple TV sets

PLasma? you must be kidding. LED or LCD yes but plasma No

 

[appleguy123]

It might work if Apple could subsidize the TV with a company that offers Internet and cable service(like AT&T).
52" Apple TV just $499 with two year contract.
Thoughts?

 

[Consultant]

Probably regurgitating a few year old rumor.

Apple isn't going to sell TVs in store. There isn't room for it.

Apple will sell improved Apple TV though.

 

[Doctor Q]

Forget the TV. I want larger and larger Apple displays on my desk. They don't need anything special built-in. I'll run whatever media app I want on my Mac.

 

[skellener]

Plasmas use too much power. I would expect if Apple did to a television, it would be LED to reduce energy consumption. I don't think they will do a television though.

I think they should just license AirPlay instead. It would probably make more sense to offer AirPlay in a receiver though, instead of a TV. Then the signal would just get pumped out to any type of TV you want. Just a thought.

 

[paradox00]

TVs with an Apple TV dock or ones that supported video AirPlay would make a lot more sense.

 

[bbydon]

So let me get this straight - Apple can "barely" (by iOS device standards) sell the $99 Apple TV, but they are going to roll out actual TVs?

Not happening. Just keep adding features (*cough* apps *cough*) to the $99 ATV and they'll move.

I used to think this but the more i see airplay the more i think they want the ipad too hold the apps and the Apple Tv be nothing more than a mirroring device. Its hard enough to do anything with that stupid apple remote.... the ipad solves that.

 

[Icaras]

PLasma? you must be kidding. LED or LCD yes but plasma No

Kidding? Why? For proper movie viewing on a TV, Plasma screens are still king of the hill. Look it up, or better yet, visit avsforum.com and find out for yourself.

However, that said, I am inclined to believe with skellener. As better as Plasma screens are for viewing film content, Apple strikes me as the company to be more eco-friendly about it and if I had to guess, would probably go the LED route anyway.

 

[FrizzleFryBen]

I love my Apple TVs. However I couldn't imagine what a full TV remote would look like if apple had a say. Sure Apple TV remotes work because the OS is designed around them. Might be a cool way to integrate some touch into the remote that's actually useful....but with real buttons!

Either way, I'm sticking with set top for a long time. My LCDs are too new to want to replace within the foreseeable future.