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

Apple Nixed Plans for Apple-Branded Television Set 'More Than a Year Ago'

samcraig said:
If you say so. To further my point, the profit margins on TV sets ate also much lower than Apple is accustomed.
Click to expand...

While I don't think a TV set makes sense for Apple it's not because of profit margins. It's because the future is mobile. Also I think people have shown they don't want 'smart' TVs. They want a basic TV with great picture quality and the box they connect to it to be 'smart'. People like Gene Munster are just looking at Apple's revenue base and thinking Apple will have a hard time significantly growing the top line with a $100 box. But I think they need to look at other areas, like the automobile for the big ticket item to drive top line growth. And who knows what else Apple has in the wearables pipeline where they've shown they're not afraid to go luxury.
 
Last edited:
I think the future is more in dumb displays with a possibility to connect smart devices such as mobile phones or ATVs etc. Even high-end TVs are plagued by badly implemented “smart” features that are impossible to turn off and degrade the experience. Just give me a dumb but premium 4K display and let a device of my choosing control the entire thing. This setup would solve the problem of having to “upgrade” the TV every few years because the processor can’t catch up to the newer software.

In that sense I would be all over a truly dumb Apple Display at 50” for X dollars and buy or upgrade a truly amazing ATV every two years or so for 199 dollars. I’m prepared to pay premium price for a truly awesome dumb display.

edit: absolutely agree with what Rogifan says above.
 
This suggests to me that they are pursuing a 'Mac Mini' approach (ie. connect your own display) rather than the 'iMac' approach (an all-in-one box).

This seems sensible.. much more cost-efficient - and indeed environmentally sound - to have a display that lasts many years, and a smaller box that is upgradeable.

----------
peterdevries said:
..
Click to expand...

indeed. Great minds...
 
Rogifan said:
While I don't think a TV set makes sense for Apple it's not because of profit margins. It's because the future is mobile. Also I think people have shown they don't want 'smart' TVs. They want a basic TV with great picture quality and the box they connect to it to be 'smart'. People like Gene Munster are just looking at Apple's revenue base and thinking Apple will have a hard time significantly growing the top line with a $100 box. But I think they need to look at other areas, like the automobile for the big ticket item to drive top line growth. And who knows what else Apple has in the wearables pipeline where they've shown they're not afraid to go luxury.
Click to expand...

But that's all related. To make a TV that would sell and have enough profit margin wouldn't be something the public would be likely to buy. It's not economically viable. As I've said (and you and others) - much better to have an external component/hub than an integrated television.

As a side note - and I'll try to find you the source - one reviewer that was looking at smart watches (a few of them) commented that at this time, it's the wrong phrase. He states that none of the smart watches (at this time) are truly "smart" and that is why some are either holding out and/or don't "get it" or aren't necc "happy" with their devices. I tend to agree at this stage in the game.

Related to your post because I never thought TV's were ever "smart" - they were just internet enabled. That doesn't make something smart.
 
Not surprised, the existing Apple TV concept potentially does everything imaginable except displaying the actual pixels, and other companies have already perfected the "pixel arrays" that the Apple TV sends its data to.
 
Truly optimal for me would be a box that I could connect to a dumb TV that would do the following:
  • provide subscription based on-demand TV such as Netflix, HBO Go, iTunes Store etc. without the necessity of a cable connection
  • provide the ability to parse a normal cable TV connection and filter what is coming through:
    • Automatically record shows based on my evolving preferences
    • Suggest shows that are on based on my preferences
    • Suggest free shows when I try to buy a show on an on-demand platform
    • snip out advertisements during recording
    • Allow me to ban all channels from my TV that I don't want to see
  • Provide ability to connect to the internet with a desktop quality browser
  • App store for dedicated apps and games
Happy to pay a few hundreds for the box and a few thousand for a good dumb display.
 
You know how Apple's devices, deep down are jam packed full of other companies hardware.
Hell, even the Apple Watch is.

I'm being realistic, not negative.

I would Love Apple to design all their own internals, and to make the best performing ones in any product.

If Apple produced computers with their own GPU's in them, that left AMD and Nvidia in the dust I'd be more than happy.

Or a CPU way faster than Intel.

I'm not hoping to see either soon though :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mixed Feelings on the value

Right now I pay about 83 bucks for 190 channels thru Dish, Out of those channels I probably watch 40, not including the locals. Plus I get my sports teams the Red Sox and Bruins. Plus I get a DVR and its a good one in the Hopper and one additional Outlet via the Joey box. Also they offered me this week HBO for 6 months for $9. So right now I'm pretty happy what I get, we'll have to see what's in Apple's Package, if it has a store then hopefully it will have Plex
 
Rogifan said:
Spotify on my iPhone says hi.
Click to expand...

So apple purposely rolled out a Spofigy client? :rolleyes:

No, That's my point they're not rolling out services to drive people of their services. iOS does have products form other companies, like google maps and what not that do compete
 
Scarpad said:
Mixed Feelings on the value

Right now I pay about 83 bucks for 190 channels thru Dish, Out of those channels I probably watch 40, not including the locals. Plus I get my sports teams the Red Sox and Bruins. Plus I get a DVR and its a good one in the Hopper and one additional Outlet via the Joey box. Also they offered me this week HBO for 6 months for $9. So right now I'm pretty happy what I get, we'll have to see what's in Apple's Package, if it has a store then hopefully it will have Plex
Click to expand...

The issue that I would have with your setup is how to navigate the content. What to watch and when? I would love to have a solution that can combine the content of all these sources and present the options to me in a user-friendly way. I don't want to channel hop for 5 hours until I see something interesting. Also the recommendation engine of e.g. Netflix is for me not accurate enough.
 
peterdevries said:
The issue that I would have with your setup is how to navigate the content. What to watch and when? I would love to have a solution that can combine the content of all these sources and present the options to me in a user-friendly way. I don't want to channel hop for 5 hours until I see something interesting. Also the recommendation engine of e.g. Netflix is for me not accurate enough.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty aware of what I want to watch and setting a season pass is easy enough, bbut even dish offers a lot on demand so if I forget to set a pass then I can usually see it on demand
 
Scarpad said:
I'm pretty aware of what I want to watch and setting a season pass is easy enough, bbut even dish offers a lot on demand so if I forget to set a pass then I can usually see it on demand
Click to expand...

I know, but ideally (for me) the box would completely divorce the watching of shows from the broadcasting.

Let all the networks and content vendors pipe content towards the box, that subsequently stores that content based on my preferences and discards the rest. I would then not need more than the current Apple TV interface because all content would be categorized and in its place ready for me to watch it.


(I would like a redesign of that interface but you get my point).
 
I still say all Apple has to do it get a current moderate to high end TV company to put together a small range of 4K sets under the Apple Brand, given then a nice brushed Aluminum frame surround, an Apple logo, and slap a user upgradable Apple TV Module in the side, and you would have instant thousands of sales from millions of Apple fans.

Nothing more is needed than that, people would just love it, to compliment their other Apple products.

Shame Apple are too self important to take this simple step :(
 
Rogifan said:
While I don't think a TV set makes sense for Apple it's not because of profit margins. It's because the future is mobile. Also I think people have shown they don't want 'smart' TVs. They want a basic TV with great picture quality and the box they connect to it to be 'smart'. People like Gene Munster are just looking at Apple's revenue base and thinking Apple will have a hard time significantly growing the top line with a $100 box. But I think they need to look at other areas, like the automobile for the big ticket item to drive top line growth. And who knows what else Apple has in the wearables pipeline where they've shown they're not afraid to go luxury.
Click to expand...

But with an app store supposedly coming to the new Apple TV, that changes a lot. The box price can still stay relatively low, and Apple will make up the profit in app sales. The key is that the apps have to be things that people want (especially cord cutters), and the price has to be right so Apple and the developer are making money, since Apple TV app sales are obviously going to be lower than sales on iPhones and iPads.

Let the companies who are good at making TVs do that, and Apple should concentrate on making a good box to connect to the tv that can output 4k, play games, run apps, HomeKit, etc. I think that HomeKit will make ATV much more popular if done right.
 
garya73 said:
Let the companies who are good at making TVs do that
Click to expand...

But no-one is good at making TVs. There are a few that are good at making displays, but there is not a TV maker on this planet that has been able to make a TV that is simple to use while allowing for a large number of content inputs. They are all a hopscotch of badly implemented UIs using obsolete processors with admittedly some great TV panels.
 
makes sense. TV production seems like a losing business. Does anyone outside of samsung even make money producing TVs?
 
cogitodexter said:
I just wish they'd get on with releasing a 4K Cinema Display.

I have space on my desk for two and a credit card waiting to be melted.
Click to expand...

It would be 5K to match up with the iMac, but yes, I will be ready to upgrade my iMac at the end of the year and would love two additional 5k displays to fill my desk.
 
The whole TV ecosystem needs an operating system that doesn't exert a vacuum.

Please please license aTV OS.
 
mattopotamus said:
makes sense. TV production seems like a losing business. Does anyone outside of samsung even make money producing TVs?
Click to expand...

Good question. I bought a Philips TV last year because I love Ambilight. Little did I know that the screen was fantastic, but the software sucked so much that it made the TV unusable. Random crashes, rebooting randomly and it turned itself on all the time during the night. In the end I returned after 9 months and was informed that most of this type was returned by consumers (top model).

Judging by the quality of software etc. I guess a lot of money in TV production is lost on software development and testing of the "smart" TV.

So I would really be interested in the cost of a simple panel such as a Cinema Display with only one input port (for an all-knowing and controlling smart box) and a plug for power.

Let the software experts do the software and let the display experts do the displays.
 
senseless said:
I have my doubts about 4K TV taking off, let alone a high priced Apple version. 4K has been out for a while and I don't know anyone that owns one or even talking about getting one. Will this go the way of 3D television?
Click to expand...

4k will take off, but not b.c the 4k resolution. It will succeed b.c of things like HDR, new color specs, etc.

HDR alone is worth upgrading TVs
 
We can only hope this is true

What a waste of time trying to get into a low margin, massively competitive market.

Let the display manufacturers duke it out for the TV displays. Apple needs to fight on one front and that's the STB. They are already falling behind in terms of ease of use and functionality but are gaining with proprietary content.

Apple TV boxes need to be a HomeKit hub, STB, Game Platform, Social Hub, Chat platform (video and text/messaging) and Cord Cutters dream (live and on-demand content not found ANYWHERE ELSE).
 
The Last Mile

The problem with an iTV is it's not dealing with the issue consumers are facing, the last mile.

The last mile for internet where everything is monopolized by the big 3 and the last mile for TV where all entertainment is designed by the same ilks...

The people who make the screens for all the Apple gadgets also make their own TVs, why would Apple ask them to do the same thing and throw a logo on it. They're better off manufacturing screens for their product instead of developing a TV.
 
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