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

Analyst Continues to Believe Apple Will Launch Internet-Connected TV

There are so many things wrong with this article I don't know where to start.

For one, there's no way an Apple Television (I'm'a call it "iTV") would eliminate those devices... Unless iTunes had EVERY SINGLE TV show from EVERY SINGLE broadcaster, some will inevitably still require a cable package from Comcast or whomever... It won't replace any game console because it will not carry the titles that millions of people buy Wiis, XBoxes, and Playstations for. Having said that, you won't be able to eliminate your audio tuner as you'll still have multiple sources of input... not to mention that it's what makes surround sound possible at all, which is a necessity for anyone who wants a better-than-average home-entertainment system.

Secondly, $2000????? In 2 to 4 years, $2000 better get me more than a measly 40-incher... I saw a really nice Samsung (had to be ~40") for $800-something at Target this week. I smell serious shenanigans in Gene's numbers...

Third, there's nothing this "$2000" device can do that the existing AppleTV device can't be enabled to do, very easily. Even DVR capabilities would be a snap as long as it had a live TV throughput and an HDD that was worth something.

I will readily admit that there's a lot of room to consolidate the functions of a TV, but Apple should strive to be the hub into which it all integrates - and combine with iTunes connectivity, and DVR functionality. There's no need to reinvent the wheel.

This device makes no sense.

-Clive
 
sorry but if apple did this it would be a big fail. i wouldnt want to replace my tv and have little to no control at how it works. thats why they have the :apple:tv.
 
I'm a fanboy, but Apple has shown it doesn't really give much of a patoot about the home theater. Why? Because AppleTV is a gimmick at best, and it sure as heck isn't competitively priced.

I would like an AppleTV device, but I would rather TV makers allow apps to be written and then for Apple to put software in the TV. I don't need a damn box for every little thing I want to do. My Blu-ray Disc player has Blockbuster, Netflix, Pandora and YouTube built in. That model now costs about $250 with built-in WiFi and a screaming fast BD load time.

Why can't Apple team with LG and Samsung just like Netflix did? Get SD card slots built into all these devices and put software apps like that on there. AppleTV's remote has all of three buttons, so it's not like remotes can't control it.

I also agree with the people complaining about the price point. I can get a Samsung 55" LED HDTV for about $2200. Two years from now, that exact product should cost me $1500 or less. I buy Apple computers, which are technically more expensive, because they work a lot better than PCs. You'd have to throw in A LOT to make a TV work better.
 
baryon said:
I think that what would make sense is not an all-in-on TV (including the huge screen), but a better Apple TV set-top box thing. Apple already has that working, why not just make a new version of the Apple TV, and allow it to stream live TV from the net?
Click to expand...

That would be good too. An AppleTV with live streaming and built-in DVD (or BluRay) player. At least that would eliminate the Satellite dish, satellite receiver, dvd player, and a couple of remotes.

I would be happy with that. :)
 
Clive At Five said:
There are so many things wrong with this article I don't know where to start.

For one, there's no way an Apple Television (I'm'a call it "iTV") would eliminate those devices... Unless iTunes had EVERY SINGLE TV show from EVERY SINGLE broadcaster, some will inevitably still require a cable package from Comcast or whomever... It won't replace any game console because it will not carry the titles that millions of people buy Wiis, XBoxes, and Playstations for. Having said that, you won't be able to eliminate your audio tuner as you'll still have multiple sources of input... not to mention that it's what makes surround sound possible at all, which is a necessity for anyone who wants a better-than-average home-entertainment system...This device makes no sense.

-Clive
Click to expand...

What if the shows were not streamed through iTunes? :)

What if you sign up for service with a satellite provider, and instead of connecting their satellite to their receiver, they would connect it directly to the Apple TV?

This won't happen any time soon, haha. I'm just saying I would LOVE to eliminate having to use separate devices. I would love my surround sound system, satellite receiver, BluRay player, and Apple TV to be ONE DEVICE.

I can dream, can't I??!! :eek:
 
Licensing

While Apple, in general, has no interest in licensing their OS, the TV market appears to be one that's not particularly interesting to them. Well established and no obvious advantage to a 'better' product.

Based on that, and the fact that a TV isn't going to compete with a computer, I could see Apple licensing iPhone OS to a TV manufacturer to add one more leg to the iTunes/AppleTV/iPhone/iPad/iPod ecosystem.

Or, perhaps an Apple remote - competing with the Logitech Harmony remotes. While Harmony does a good job, I could picture several ways it could be improved, particularly by tying it to the iTunes ecosystem.
 
jragosta said:
While Apple, in general, has no interest in licensing their OS, the TV market appears to be one that's not particularly interesting to them. Well established and no obvious advantage to a 'better' product.

Based on that, and the fact that a TV isn't going to compete with a computer, I could see Apple licensing iPhone OS to a TV manufacturer to add one more leg to the iTunes/AppleTV/iPhone/iPad/iPod ecosystem.

Or, perhaps an Apple remote - competing with the Logitech Harmony remotes. While Harmony does a good job, I could picture several ways it could be improved, particularly by tying it to the iTunes ecosystem.
Click to expand...


I disagree. TV's right now are basically "dumb". Apple can add intelligence and features and integrate it better with other Apple products such as iTunes, the App store, etc.

another interesting idea though is to make the Apple TV a gaming console.

don't know if it's feasible though.
 
Apple is destined and has all the potential to take on the living room, but it better get on the ball.
 
strangeday said:
I could see the TV thing happening. I could see how apple would combine products into one device. They did this with iPhone and iMac. All-in-one. I could even picture the slide show and keynote. Jobs presenting images of a DVD player + TV + Satellite receiver & dish. Then crossing them all out and displaying all of this in one device.

Remember this?:
"An iPod. A phone. A web device. Are you getting it?"

The problem today is that there are too many different technologies. Too much clutter, remotes, settings, and issues with compatibility between brands and devices. I would like a TV with everything integrated so that things work in harmony and share one elegant, user-friendly operating system, including subscriptions for channels.

I mean, when I'm at friends houses and they put on a movie, they always have to use two remotes, usually one for changing the input of the TV, adjusting the aspect ratio, volume then another to play a disc, access he menu, then another for the satellite channels. Sometimes people use a big clunky universal remote with way too many buttons. Living room systems are just a big mess right now. Apple, please fix this.
Click to expand...

This is the key point. Cable and satellite operators, DVD manufacturers and television manufacturers have created a hodge podge that does not work well together. I'm fairly tech savvy, so I can negotiate it, but I have to go over to my Mom's house about twice a month to get her television and cable box to play together. She's given up on DVDs. As with the iTunes store and the iPad, Apple's biggest accomplishment would be to overcome the deliberate walls these entities create.

I would love to see an all in one device that would allow easy switching between video sources with one remote.
 
Really??

I've worked in various design related industries for years, as has much of my family, we're talking back to fairchild here. The one thing I can say is that this apple product - http://www.atom.com/funny_videos/ifreak/?xrs=eml_012510 - is more likely than apple doing a proper TV. I saw demos about 10 years ago of semi holographic television in a lab which has still to take off or even go anywhere near maturing into a marketable product but is regarded by some as the next step. I cannot see any interest for apple in developing for what is a saturated market both in terms of built in product redundancy/obsolescence and is so slow moving in terms of development of tech. There is also the serious issue of apple trying to be a green machine. Chucking TV's in skips is a lot harder than a laptop because they're bigger (if you hadn't noticed) and have more bad bits to work out how to be green with. That development process alone would cost apple a fortune if they are to be eco friendly. I'd also say TV's don't get changed often and the tech lasts decades, the boxes underneath the set is where the money is. Honest gov! This entire story is nonsense and will not happen! No reason for APPL to do it.
 
Michael CM1 said:
I'm a fanboy, but Apple has shown it doesn't really give much of a patoot about the home theater. Why? Because AppleTV is a gimmick at best, and it sure as heck isn't competitively priced.

I would like an AppleTV device, but I would rather TV makers allow apps to be written and then for Apple to put software in the TV. I don't need a damn box for every little thing I want to do. My Blu-ray Disc player has Blockbuster, Netflix, Pandora and YouTube built in. That model now costs about $250 with built-in WiFi and a screaming fast BD load time.

Why can't Apple team with LG and Samsung just like Netflix did? Get SD card slots built into all these devices and put software apps like that on there. AppleTV's remote has all of three buttons, so it's not like remotes can't control it.

I also agree with the people complaining about the price point. I can get a Samsung 55" LED HDTV for about $2200. Two years from now, that exact product should cost me $1500 or less. I buy Apple computers, which are technically more expensive, because they work a lot better than PCs. You'd have to throw in A LOT to make a TV work better.
Click to expand...

Actually ATV is a hobby. Even apple say so! Also i'd like to ask SD? Does anything other than the Wii use that now?
 
strangeday said:
I could see the TV thing happening. I could see how apple would combine products into one device. They did this with iPhone and iMac. All-in-one. I could even picture the slide show and keynote. Jobs presenting images of a DVD player + TV + Satellite receiver & dish. Then crossing them all out and displaying all of this in one device.

Remember this?:
"An iPod. A phone. A web device. Are you getting it?"

The problem today is that there are too many different technologies. Too much clutter, remotes, settings, and issues with compatibility between brands and devices. I would like a TV with everything integrated so that things work in harmony and share one elegant, user-friendly operating system, including subscriptions for channels.

I mean, when I'm at friends houses and they put on a movie, they always have to use two remotes, usually one for changing the input of the TV, adjusting the aspect ratio, volume then another to play a disc, access he menu, then another for the satellite channels. Sometimes people use a big clunky universal remote with way too many buttons. Living room systems are just a big mess right now. Apple, please fix this.
Click to expand...

What? You can buy a nice Logitech Harmony remote, which is easy to setup and controls almost any device out there. The remotes have nice layouts, and are available at different price points.

Apple making TVs doesn't make much sense anyways. Apple enjoys updating it's products and having people buy the new ones. Most people don't upgrade TVs on an annual basis. It's why people are even skeptical of the new 3D TVs coming out - most people just recently upgraded to HDTVs
 
Sounds like a very bogus and random thing to believe, but let's say Apple does make their own TV. I would never buy it; Apple would probably discontinue support for it once they release the 2nd or 3rd model/generation:rolleyes:
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

The problem with any plan to replace cable with Internet tv is that most providers bundle Internet and tv. My monthly bill for the two (no phone) is about $115, but it would only drop by $30 or something without the tv. This is FiOS - comcast was even more dramatic. While I had their promotional package, the cost of tv on top of Internet was literally less than $5.
 
Richard Kimball said:
This is the key point. Cable and satellite operators, DVD manufacturers and television manufacturers have created a hodge podge that does not work well together. I'm fairly tech savvy, so I can negotiate it, but I have to go over to my Mom's house about twice a month to get her television and cable box to play together. She's given up on DVDs. As with the iTunes store and the iPad, Apple's biggest accomplishment would be to overcome the deliberate walls these entities create.

I would love to see an all in one device that would allow easy switching between video sources with one remote.
Click to expand...

On the Harmony it's as simple as me pressing the Watch TV button. It switches my DirecTV box on, and switches the TV and audio receiver on and to the correct inputs. The hardest part is the initial setup which actually isn't too difficult at all. They have a web interface where the most difficult part is remembering the model number of your products.
 
Why would you want a touch-screen TV? As if anyone would get off their arses from their couch and walk up to the TV!

However, a iPhone OS on the Apple TV powered by A4 (based on today's tech) is feasible.

They could then design a PROPER and EASY TO USE remote control! That's what I hate about modern televisions & DVD / BD players. Their remotes all suck and using an all-in-one remote only makes a 'little bit' better.

I can totally imagine their UI built in to a MAGIC APPLE REMOTE! It'd be awesome? Maybe you could just use your iPhone/iPod touch to be a remote.

THINK OF THE POSSIBILITIES PEOPLE!
 
HowieR32 said:
Why would you want a touch-screen TV? As if anyone would get off their arses from their couch and walk up to the TV!

However, a iPhone OS on the Apple TV powered by A4 (based on today's tech) is feasible.

They could then design a PROPER and EASY TO USE remote control! That's what I hate about modern televisions & DVD / BD players. Their remotes all suck and using an all-in-one remote only makes a 'little bit' better.

I can totally imagine their UI built in to a MAGIC APPLE REMOTE! It'd be awesome? Maybe you could just use your iPhone/iPod touch to be a remote.

THINK OF THE POSSIBILITIES PEOPLE!
Click to expand...

A sucky remote that doesn't integrate into high-end home theaters? Sounds great.

Or you can go with the Aurora or one of many other fine remotes here http://universalremote.com/pro/products.php
 
Always rumors or analysts or predictions Apple from Piper Jaffray

No more sources? :)
Piper Jaffray=Fake
 
bijanorama said:
That'd be awesome. My newest Comcast HD cable box seems like technology from ten years ago. Plus, most current TVs are fairly tacky - I'd pay a premium for apple branded quality hardware.
Click to expand...

That's because cable company DVRs are generally technology from ten years ago. They are trash.

The government tried to force them to offer cablecards that would allow customers to integrate far more advanced devices into the cable pipeline, but cable companies successfully crippled the technology (no program guide, not PPV, etc.) and made sure there were never enough cablecards available, to discourage customers from asking for them and interrupting their "pay a huge monthly fee for a used DVR with outdated technology, small HD, and tendency to overheat and break" racket.
 
I would be very surprised that Apple would start to sell TV's. Most people by 1 TV in 10 to 20 years. Most people already replaced their tube so who will Apple want to sell it to? A TV sees a lot of devices connected during it's lifespan so expect Apple to keep updating devices that connect to a TV.
 
Time frame falls in line with my prediction of the last Apple computers being offered.
How do you spell consumer electronics company? A-P-P-L-E :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back