Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
the only way this is going to work, is if they have cracked the "ala carte" cable programming.

AND, A BIG ONE.

How to get ALL MY LOCAL SPORTS WITHOUT having a CABLE\SAT subscription.
 
...why does Apple have to make the TV itself instead of just the box. I think it's fair to assume that the TV will come in limited choices and with a hefty price. Would consumers go for that?

That's one of THE issues with this rumor. It's only going to be the perfect size for some (not like a phone where the range of possible sizes is always measured in variances of centimeters). If this rumor is true, it's a mess of issues like that (perfect size for you is not the perfect size for me, plasma vs. LCD vs. LED, reflection canceling screen or not, speaker quality or not, etc).

Is this a "thin" race thing? It's hard to imagine "thin"ner TVs than what's already out there being a big deal. Is it a "beauty" thing? Hard to imagine some new kind of Apple-like case being that big of a deal. Etc.

To a few comments offered in this thread:
  • "Subsidizing the price with providers"- why are they going to do that with Apple? They already have those programs to help sell their own services for less for new customers. Why send that subsidy money away to Apple?
  • "Better be 4K resolution"- what happened to the "720p is good enough" crowd around here? Where's the "broadband bandwidth is not big enough for 1080p", "the chart", "where are we going to store all those huge files?", etc? Two+ months ago 1080p made no sense around here because of a multitude of reasons. But now we're talking an Apple Television and there are lots of posts about something well beyond 1080p??? And where's the 4K content or is everything going to be scaled up? At least now, there are some consumer options for shooting their own stuff in 1080p and there are 1080p VOD, BD and Vudu streaming options. Where do we get the 4K content?
  • "Cut my monthly cable/satt bill"- never going to happen if Apple's solution must pump through broadband pipes owned by those same companies. A new TV can't solve the problem that between iCloud and us are pipes owned by Comcast, Time Warner, Cablevision, Verizon, AT&T, etc. If they can't keep getting theirs with video subscriptions, expect to pay more for Internet and/or tighter tier pricing (because where are you going to go if you don't like the price increases?)

There is no real magic in a TV. Everything that we come up with that is software can be put into a new :apple:TV (including a Siri microphone) for around a $99 purchase that works with any shape, size, screen type television- including the televisions we already have- and easily updated without having to toss out the whole TV.

The opportunity is in the subscription/media. Can Apple out Netflix, Vudu, etc those companies in a way that might make the dreams of alacarte and similar actually have some legs? Can some kind of arrangement be struck to make Apple become a real competitor to existing cable/satt options? Can some alternative option be employed to bypass the middlemen who control the pipes between us and iCloud (so they can't make up for the losses to their video revenues streams with higher internet fees)? Etc.

What this rumor needs is several companion rumors that solve various problems with what people keep posting as dreams & hopes along these lines. A new piece of hardware to stick in the living room doesn't solve costs of video subscriptions (else the :apple:TV could have already done so). It doesn't replace a Comcast if Comcast is also the Internet provider. It doesn't make more content available unless the various video players are motivated to help Apple make this work (and they are not going to do that without Apple's alternative being able to make them more money than the "as is" system in place now). Etc. There needs to be a bunch of related rumors.

Also, there needs to be a great hardware-based reason for an Apple Television vs. all existing players. Everything that is a software innovation can be built into an :apple:TV and used with ANY television (including those we already own). In this way, the concept of an Apple Television is not like revolutionizing smart phones, music players, tablets or computers. In all of those revolutions, you had to buy the hardware to use the many "wow!" features of the software. In this case, the software is isolated out in a little $99 box that will run on anyone's competing screen hardware. If we could buy OS X or iOS X in an Apple-endorsed way and run it on any competitors computer and any competitors phone/tablet/music player smart device, are we as compelled to buy Apple-branded hardware? That's the most fundamental issue- and difference- here. This TV would have to have something in the hardware that makes it "must have" because all the software can be run on any competing television via :apple:TV...

...unless the launch of an Apple Television spells the end of a stand-alone device called :apple:TV (to unify software & hardware like all other Apple-screened devices). I hope that's not one outcome of this rumor if it panned out.
 
Last edited:
Apple's #1 mark on changing the computer industry has always been with the introduction of a new user input device. Take the following for example:

1983: Mac - Mouse and GUI
2001: iPod - Scroll Wheel
2007: iPhone - Touch
2011: Siri - Voice

Apple introduced touch and voice interfaces? Wow, I never knew that.
 
Siri?

How about they test that in the iPad first? It was a huge disappointment that iOS 5 did not get Siri and the other gimmicks to the iPad 2. No weather forecast, no stock market news and the whole notification center seems to be kind of lost in the middle of the screen. I know that is not the main topic here, but what I am trying to say is that if Apple wants to port Siri and other features on a bigger screen, they have to do their homework. What they did to the new features on the iPad is not far from butchering it.
 
If TV Siri will be as clueless as iPhone Siri, this will be a major fail.. I mean laugh! I have an iPhone 4S, I know what I'm talking about (sic!)
 
I'm wondering how all this is actually going to work, since Apple doesn't know who your cable/satellite provider is or what package you have and therefore, aside from possibly accessing the program guide (which is frequently incorrect anyway), doesn't know what shows are playing when. Some cable/satellite companies now let you connect the set top box to a network and this would let you access the content on any device connected to the network, although IMO, this has limited practical capability, because if I'm at home, I don't need to watch a show on my iPad because I can watch on the TV.

Assuming it can all work, since there are already remote control apps for the iPhone/iPad, I would want to use a Siri-equipped phone/pad to control any TV, not just an Apple branded TV. This should be possible, but it needs to go beyond the TV. It needs to control all my auxilliary devices.

Also, I suspect that an Apple TV, for all the advantages, will be missing certain functions in the name of simplicity:
- my bet is that it will have no ISF calibration controls
- my bet is that it will have a minimum of black level, white level, color, etc. controls, if any.
- It will probably have a great, but not necessarily accurate picture.
- I wonder whether it will play nice via HDMI with other devices like Blu-ray players, A/V receivers, game machines, etc. I can see Apple making this a very closed device. That would be a deal-breaker for me, in spite of the advantages of a Siri-controlled device.

But Apple is very smart and if they break enough conventions effectively, this could conceivably be a killer device. If it's a big success, I can see Apple stock at $450-$500.
 
These TV rumours are just like the "iPad 3 in fall 2011" rumours.

Very persistent for a while and pulled out of thin air.
 
However, the "solution" is not to give EVERYONE a remote... but you're right, it's not a technology problem....

"The booing rose and died again as Piggy lifted the white, magic remote."


While talking to your "device" makes sense when you're driving a vehicle, unless you're handicapped or otherwise temporarily physically impaired, I simply don't see the advantage of talking to your computer or your television.

I can type far faster than I can talk.

and

I can push a button on my remote control far faster than I can say "SIRI, LAST CHANNEL" or "SIRI, MENU... INTERNET... NEW RELEASES.... SCROLL DOWN.... SCROLL DOWN... SELECT AIRWOLF.... SELECT SEASON TWO... SELECT EPISODE FOUR... PLAY EPISODE FOUR... etc. etc.".

Not to mention waking up whoever happens to be napping on the couch next to me with all my definitive verbal commands.


Sorry but I have to wave the "BS" flag here....You don't type faster than you talk, let alone not taking into account errors while typing. You sure as heck aren't going to press a button on a remote > select a source > select a folder > scroll through numerous files > then select "Airwolf" faster than you could say "Siri, play Airwolf season two episode four.

You also assume that you have the remote in your hand ready to go... Sorry but I like to put the remote down and get comfortable when I want to watch an engaging show.

See, I imagine it where you don't have to tell Siri to scroll down. You tell it what you want to watch and it gives you options. Whether they be on your media server, from your cable company, Netflix or off of the internet. Now, imagine it learns that, me personally, I really enjoy the History channel - hmmm.... So it keeps that in mind when I speak to it and it will also notify me that there is an unwatched episode of Ancient Aliens available.

It learns your viewing habits and it takes that into account before you even have to go "searching" for something to watch.

Imagine if you get home from work and you simply say: "Siri, I want to watch an action move starring Matt Damon." It replies back with movie options and you say: "Siri, Borne Ultimatum."

The whole time you're winding down getting into something more comfortable and not sitting on the couch looking at a screen. What if while you're speaking to Siri, you're breaking out a cold beer or preparing a snack and say: "Siri, what time does the Broncos game start?" Siri comes back and states: "The game is already playing on Channel 3, would you like to watch it?" "Siri, yes."

The whole time you're busy doing something else. Now granted depending on the size and layout of your house, it may or may not be a feasible scenario. My kitchen happens to be open to the living room.

I can see Siri as being always "on" and not having to press any buttons. Let's face it, if you have to press a button, you might as well just use a remote. I can see that you have to say Siri or some other "code word" for it to respond to your inputs. I can also see having profiles with authority levels, so you can override your children when they are screaming at the top of their lungs at the tv to watch some kids show.

I can also see Apple, licensing or making the use of Siri free to 3rd parties, similar to Airplay. Imagine if your entire home theatre system would be recognized by Siri automatically once it was powered on. You could then play a movie and tell Siri if you wanted to use the 7.1 surround sound system or the speakers in the tv. You never have to do any setup at all; it just works.

Also imagine if you're watching tv in your living room and you feel like finish watching the show in your bedroom before you go to sleep; you tell, "Siri, pause the program and I want to finish watching in bedroom."

All of your Apple TVs would be synced and everything would simply just work. Also imagine if you are in your study, you pick up your iPhone and ask: "Siri, what is Bobby watching on tv?" Siri: "Bobby is watching Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince." Everything could be synced across the cloud.

Imagine getting a notification from Siri that one of your favourite shows is on and Siri is asking if you want it recorded so you can watch it when you get home.

Just some ideas...
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

apple are working on a TV..... wow spectacular powers of deduction. But Siri a major part of it, really, honestly?!?!? Why talk to the tv when you can press a button?! Siri is a gimick for a phone, not a remote replacement. No it will have to be somthing else as a killer feature, Siri is not it!
 
If TV Siri will be as clueless as iPhone Siri, this will be a major fail.. I mean laugh! I have an iPhone 4S, I know what I'm talking about (sic!)

I find Siri to work well

----------

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

apple are working on a TV..... wow spectacular powers of deduction. But Siri a major part of it, really, honestly?!?!? Why talk to the tv when you can press a button?! Siri is a gimick for a phone, not a remote replacement. No it will have to be somthing else as a killer feature, Siri is not it!

Why look for the remote when you can "TV, change to HBO".
 
Good thing Apple couldn't care less what you think. I'd wager you've had the same reaction to every product they're released in the last 10 years. This makes perfect utter sense.

Which is why I have a MBP, iPod and have had every iPhone right?

Why does this make sense? The only cool thing would be using iOS devices as a remote. Who the **** wants to talk to their television? Seriously (or should I say Siriously...).

Siri is kinda cool and all, but only saves a few seconds at most.

This would be silly of Apple to release.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

This is not an area I see apple bringing much to the table. I think tv already works ok. Cable maybe not so much. But tv is easy. You turn it on, watch a show. Easy. Can it get easier? Google tv showed it can get alot worse.

They innovated in computers, mp3 players, phones, tablet computing. But those things were subpar- tvs so simple. Plus tv needs no Internet because it's got the amazing bandwidth of broadcast. Hmmm. Good luck to them. I think that may be an expensive hobby. But they surprise us.
 
I can see Siri as being always "on" and not having to press any buttons. Let's face it, if you have to press a button, you might as well just use a remote. I can see that you have to say Siri or some other "code word" for it to respond to your inputs. I can also see having profiles with authority levels, so you can override your children when they are screaming at the top of their lungs at the tv to watch some kids show.

See, if Siri is always on, and I'm watching, say, Giants-Cowboys with my buddy, and I say something like "...and when we play the Redskins next week...", how will Siri know not to show me the Redskins game right now?
 
As a geek, I appreciate all the tangential discussions about features but most of us are in the minority... If Apple is going for Siri-enabled TV, I have to say that if done right it's going to be the killer convergence device.

My greatest contention with media center PC's and the like has always been that having a computer, keyboard and standard browser on a big screen in a living room is not a functional improvement over using a computer at a desktop. It makes the setup and location convenient but doesn't make the experience fundamentally better than a laptop or iPad. It's just having a computer on a big screen in the living room.

My experience with Siri, minus systems hiccups here and there (which I expect for a beta), has been extremely useful in doing several things all by conversation in which the other participant, Siri, understands the context of what I'm really asking.

This is as close to mind-reading as you can get in the consumer devices space right now... and, again if done right (which Apple is pretty damned good at figuring out exactly how to do), it will make interactive television a reality where VOD, PPV, media centers PC's, etc. have, in my view, all fallen short of a truly interactive experience that takes less time to produce results than the alternatives.
 
$100-$200 isn't that much Apple-tax. You pay a lot more on some of their other products.

That's my point, Apple goes for a premium product and a premium price and a premium profit margin on their products. I just wonder how much extra Apple will want to charge for a 46 inch TV? And will the mass market be willing to pay for it? Or is this just a niche market product that some of us might pay the Apple tax on, just because it integrates seamlessly with all of our other Apple products?
 
Multi-touch 3D and Siri

These two were made for each other. This is a cool way to run a TV. No remote. Siri, what's on tonight? Siri displays a list of programs on a grid. You scroll down and across with two fingers in space. Double tap to select, or, just, "Siri, start playing Revenge, 8pm."

Cost to view:
Non-premium:
One hour program 99¢. Month subscription to this program $2.99. Season subscription to the same program (20 episodes) $9.99
Premium:
Double the prices.
Public TV:
Free

Want to surf?
Free 5 minutes for each hour program. You find one you want, click and choose to view from beginning (99¢) or subscribe to season ($3.99) and watch all previous episodes at your leisure.
 
Last edited:
I'm 50/50, it'd prob be a grea TV.....but i bet :apple: would charge through the roof for it. Plus, I bet they'll do a new one every year cycle and really people can't by new TV's every year. Plus some flat screens can be had at some great prices! I'm mixed on this....

Sony, LG, Toshiba, and Samsung make a refresh of their TVs and Stereo systems every year. That is how the industry works. Phones, Stereos and TVs refresh every year, video game systems every 5 to 7 years (actually they refresh every 2 to 3 years...look at how the PS3 and Xbox 360 has changed since 2005-2006.)
 
Has anyone tried asking Siri on the 4S if she has plans to move to television?
lol
I wonder if Siri Team built in a response for that :))
 
See, if Siri is always on, and I'm watching, say, Giants-Cowboys with my buddy, and I say something like "...and when we play the Redskins next week...", how will Siri know not to show me the Redskins game right now?

Home button on a simplified, AppleTV-style remote to activate Siri, just like on the iPhone 4.
 
such a waste to have a combined puck and monitor. at least have it where you can upgrade the computer part without having to buy a new tv. too expensive to replace every 2 years
 
See, if Siri is always on, and I'm watching, say, Giants-Cowboys with my buddy, and I say something like "...and when we play the Redskins next week...", how will Siri know not to show me the Redskins game right now?

There would have to be a command word. Like "Siri", which will put her in to listen mode.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.