Apple Reportedly Investigating Television Set Components as Anticipation Builds

[HobeSoundDarryl]

What remains unknown is whether Apple will be able to make any revolutionary changes on the content side within that timeframe. The company has made several efforts to work with content providers on ideas such as "best of TV" packages that would be made available through iTunes and enable users to in some cases eliminate their cable television subscriptions, but the company has reportedly made little progress in those negotiations.

IMO, the concept of a television product launched by Apple must overcome the massive obstacle described in the above quote. And even that comes with tremendous issues.

For example, who owns the broadband pipes that would flow the cableTV killer from Apple to this TV (where I am that's Comcast or AT&T- both of which like their cable subscription revenues "as is")? Why are they going to allow Apple to steal their revenue stream through pipes they own? The missing rumor is something that would allow an Apple solution to bypass the broadband gatekeepers who are also in the business of selling cableTV subscriptions. That rumor is desperately needed for this rumor to gain much credibility (to me anyway).

There are tremendous revenues in commercials. There are tremendous revenues in cable/satt bills "as is". Some of those revenues feed the content creation infrastructure. The dream of no commercials removes about $49 Billion from that feed in the U.S. alone. Yes, there's profit in there but there's also money that pays for actually creating the stuff we want to see. When we dream of an Apple cable killer, we generally dream of it being ONLY what we want to see (aka "just the channels I want to watch" al-a-carte) often commercial free.

The kicker is that that dream is usually accompanied with a cheap price on an assumption that if 200 channels cost $100/month (or 50 cents each) the 10-20 to which "I really want to subscribe" should cost about $5-$10/month. A model change from $100/month + commercial revenues to $5-$10/month with no commercials will kill the volume & quality of content production.

Even the rumored $29/month subscription for "just what I want" makes no sense. Take the revenue made ONLY from the commercials- $49 billion- and divide it by the number of households in the U.S. (about 300 million people at about 4 people per household = 75 million households). $49 billion divided by 75 million = $654 per year (per household in just industry-supporting revenue made from commercials). If the replacement model is commercial free and if we want to maintain the same industry infrastructure that depends on that revenue, we consumers must make up that cost. $654/12 months = $54.5 per household. See why the rumored $29/month concept doesn't fly?

Set that aside. If we assume the "greedy cable monopolies" are taking about 50% of our $100/month bill as profit (which is not true), then the hard cost of the content must be about $50/month per household. See why the rumored $29/month concept doesn't fly?

Now blend them in the dream concept: no commercials, bypass the greedy cable company, and we have to reconcile about $154/month in the current model down to just $29/month in an imagined Apple replacement model. Won't Apple want their 30% too?

This whole rumor is just a mess when someone logically thinks it through. And I still haven't seen a single rumor that offers anything positive about what I quoted above (forget all the math I just offered).

I love TV and long for an updated one (and anticipate that THAT is much more likely than a whole television). I just don't see an Apple Television flying. The above is just a few of the obstacles. Don't forget the live sports issue. How about local channels? Can Apple make a screen size that is a mainstream desired size for many? Can Apple choose a panel technology that is mainstream desirable for many? What about the port options? Locked only to iTunes? There's just so many issues.

Biggest for me is the content sourcing referenced above. A close second is the concept that a $100 or so set-top box could bring just about anything that might be done in software to ANY HDTV from anyone else. When Apple software can be run on any competitor's hardware, Apple hardware must then compete toe-to-toe on its own merits. I just don't see it.

 

[whooleytoo]

Will be great if you can subscribe and pay for only the channels you wish to receive. Otherwise it'll be just another TV with a massive premium attached.

More likely IMO - you'll pay only for the programmes you wish to see.

If Apple are true to form, then they see this TV as primarily a screen for viewing internet-delivered content. Viewing cable/satellite/aerial delivered channels will be a 'legacy' option for this box.

 

[ABernardoJr]

There are so many significant problems with an iTV. How do you elegantly solve the problem of obsolescence? Imagine trying to run iOS 5 on the 4 year old iPhone1, now imagine trying to run iOS8 on a 7 year old iPhone 1. People simply don’t upgrade their televisions frequently enough. You’ve got removable “brains” like Samsung is going to do, but that seems inelegant and fraught with problems. There’s the iPad/iPhone as brain, but that too introduces problems both technical and positioning.

The far larger problem though is an iTV forced to deal with Cable/Satellite providers doesn’t solve the problem of television. An iTunes subscription deal doesn’t solve the problem of live television.

Unless Apple has something big planned and can whip a few Cable/Satellite companies inline like they did with cell phone operators I can’t see an iTV being successful.

Why do you assume that Apple will run the same lifecycle model for TVs as they do with phones? Is that even logical? Does Samsung, LG, etc not make phones AND TVs? Do they update their TVs as frequently as they update their phones? So why would you assume Apple would not be wise enough to recognize the different lifecycles?

 

[alent1234]

There are so many significant problems with an iTV. How do you elegantly solve the problem of obsolescence? Imagine trying to run iOS 5 on the 4 year old iPhone1, now imagine trying to run iOS8 on a 7 year old iPhone 1. People simply don’t upgrade their televisions frequently enough. You’ve got removable “brains” like Samsung is going to do, but that seems inelegant and fraught with problems. There’s the iPad/iPhone as brain, but that too introduces problems both technical and positioning.

The far larger problem though is an iTV forced to deal with Cable/Satellite providers doesn’t solve the problem of television. An iTunes subscription deal doesn’t solve the problem of live television.

Unless Apple has something big planned and can whip a few Cable/Satellite companies inline like they did with cell phone operators I can’t see an iTV being successful.

if they sell it cheap enough then i can see a 5 year replacement cycle.

but TV on day 1
two more iOS upgrades takes you to year 2 plus 1 day
then most apps don't require the latest iOS so you have another 2 years after that

if the TV is sold cheap enough like a lot of TV's these days then people will replace them every 3-5 years

 

[gugy]

Not. Going. To. Happen.

Do people actually realize that it's always Gene Munster repeating his own nonsense, and no other decent sources have sprung up so far?

yep.
Just still surprise people post the crap this guy says. Gene is just trying to have his name all over the internet when he come up with this stories without no credibility at all.
I would think after all these years people would have forget about him.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I hope Apple has found a way to bypass cable completely and get content from the internet, otherwise there won't be anything revolutionary about this.

Is your broadband connection not owned by a company in the cableTV subscription business? If Apple's solution flows thorough the pipes owned by Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Time Warner, Cablevision, etc- aka companies that like their cable revenues "as is"- won't they just jack up their broadband rates to make up the difference (due to "increasing bandwidth usage" of course, not loss of cable subscription revenues)?

This answer you seek requires bypassing the broadband gatekeepers. It needs a companion rumor that would allow Apple to link end users directly to iCloud. That's been missing throughout this Television rumor all along.

 

[Apple Key]

I don't quite get how people think that Apple would need to upgrade the TVs ever year or so. Today, right now, Apple knows all of the features that should be included in the television (If you want, I can list them). The only thing that will change this is new technology (higher resolution display, 3D, the next big thing...). All of these changes are minor when it comes to our enjoyment and viewing content. You can upgrade when they add them, but you can still enjoy the TV almost the same without them, and wait a few years before upgrading.

Sure, as it is the Apple way, they will add some software only features that only the new TVs will have, just to entice you. My point is that most of the changes/features that Apple would need to introduce are software only.

 

[Will do good]

Hopefully this additional product will not put any additional pressure on Foxconn employees. They're close to the edge as it is.

And where do you get this information? Are you there working at the factory?

Is that why thousands more worker line up to work for Foxconn

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

My Comcast is 250GB. So if you just dump cable or directv and try to watch content using Internet streaming or downloads only, you will likely exceed your allocation quickly. And at least Comcast's punishment is to ban you from their service for at least a year after one warning. And they have NO residential service that provide more data allocation. You might be able to buy a business internet connection, but I don't know what their restrictions on that are (user agreement, etc.)

I also have Comcast. A key detail you left out of your good post is the cost of that business plan (for more capacity): http://business.comcast.com/smb/services/Internet/plans

If Apple's solution depends on someone like Comcast's pipes, it's just like Apples cell phone solution depending on someone like AT&T's virtual pipes: ever-tightening tiers with ever-rising pricing. Lost cable revenue? No problem, we'll make it up on ever-tightening broadband tiers and ever-rising pricing.

 

[Shadyriley]

Apple has a lot of money to spend. They will prob buy out Cable companies not buy out but pay a huge large sum upfront to use their content plus money on the backed from apple subscription feeds, it will be hard for the cable companies to say no. And don't worry about the price, Apple will offer very generous PAYMENT PLANS for their TV's, everyone will be able to afford it.

 

[topmounter]

It is NOT a technology problem.

It is a content problem.


Not even Apple can write a check big enough to get ABC / ESPN / Disney, Discovery, Viacom, A&E Networks, HBO, Turner, Fox Networks, etc. etc. etc. to nullify their very lucrative existing programming contracts with Dish Network, DirecTV, Comcast, TWC, etc., etc. etc.

Not to mention the massive advertising revenue shift these guys would have to endure if they pulled the rug out from under the Nielsen Broadcast Ratings racket.

 

[Djdcyphr]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Apple launches its own satelites or purchases one of the existing. Done

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I don't quite get how people think that Apple would need to upgrade the TVs ever year or so. Today, right now, Apple knows all of the features that should be included in the television (If you want, I can list them). The only thing that will change this is new technology (higher resolution display, 3D, the next big thing...). All of these changes are minor when it comes to our enjoyment and viewing content. You can upgrade when they add them, but you can still enjoy the TV almost the same without them, and wait a few years before upgrading.

Sure, as it is the Apple way, they will add some software only features that only the new TVs will have, just to entice you. My point is that most of the changes/features that Apple would need to introduce are software only.

Then there's 2 issues:

1. Apple itself says it's in the hardware business. Apple's business models revolve around selling hardware not software updates. Even the Mac Pro doesn't wait 5 or so years between updates.
2. If nearly the entirety of what would make this Apple offering compelling is solely in the software, a small set-top box at $100 or so can completely duplicate that software experience on whatever HDTVs we already own.

To fly, there has to be more to it than just software... or part of the plan has to involve killing off the TV as a standalone option to re-unify the exclusivity of an Apple software experience ONLY being available on a piece of Apple-branded hardware. As long as the software can be available in a separate box that delivers the exact same software-based benefits (and future software update benefits) to ANY brand of HDTV, the "what's special" element of the blend of hardware + software in an Apple product is significantly undermined.

IMO, I have no issue what-so-ever with a separate TV box vs. having it integrated into a Television set. I certainly wouldn't throw out my Samsung HDTV because I don't like the software experience being separated from the television set hardware. Again IMO, I don't have any issues with the esthetics of a separate little box nor is there much confusion in hooking a new one to an HDTV with just a single cable with ends that only fit one shape of port on that TV.

Even the suggestion that all TVs currently have crappy UI is weak. After the initial setup, do we really use our TVs UIs much anymore? At my house- for example- the Dish DVR box manages most of the programming we watch, an TV UI manages the rest. I hardly ever even use the TV's UI. Yes, it is not very good when I do use it but it's not such a terrible experience that I would jettison the HDTV I have for a better UI that I might almost never use.

----------

Apple launches its own satelites or purchases one of the existing. Done

That's one way to solve the "bypass the middleman" issue. Launching satts means this can't possibly arrive in the next few years. Buying one of the existing players- probably DISH- is the shortcut (but that's only a U.S.-centric solution) and I bet it couldn't get approved, integrated, and ("it just) work"ing by even 2015 if they purchased today.

 

[Shrink]

It is NOT a technology problem.

It is a content problem.


Not even Apple can write a check big enough to get ABC / ESPN / Disney, Discovery, Viacom, A&E Networks, HBO, Turner, Fox Networks, etc. etc. etc. to nullify their very lucrative existing programming contracts with Dish Network, DirecTV, Comcast, TWC, etc., etc. etc.

Not to mention the massive advertising revenue shift these guys would have to endure if they pulled the rug out from under the Nielsen Broadcast Ratings racket.

This ^^^ is what I believe is the issue. It would be nice just to be able to select, for example, premium movie channels. But somehow I don't see DishTV, Verizon, ATT, etc. giving up their death grip on that content.

Personally, I just watch movies. If I could just subscribe to the premium, HD movies channels - that would be a selling point for me - but I don't see that happening.

And then there is the question of the price of the set...

 

[bpfesq]

If they're just now contacing potential component manufacturers, this product is at least a year out. Maybe 2.

 

[Oletros]

I stopped reading when I saw Gene Munster

 

[gugy]

I have a 60" Pioneer Elite display. Am I selling it for an Apple Television? No freaking way.
Apple just need to update their ATV's boxes and make it super great with nice features and most importantly figure out a way to distribute content, something a la carte. There is where the revolution is.
Forget about television set, like me, millions of people are happy with their sets and they keep it for long time. The last thing we want is a hardware we need to upgrade at much faster pace.
ATV box at $99 or ever $200 bucks is a no brainer and people can update it without breaking a sweat. My TV display, I hope lasts another 6 to 7 years at least before considering a new set.

 

[Apple Key]

Then there's 2 issues:

1. Apple itself says it's in the hardware business. Apple's business models revolve around selling hardware not software updates. Even the Mac Pro doesn't wait 5 or so years between updates.
2. If nearly the entirety of what would make this Apple offering compelling is solely in the software, a small set-top box at $100 or so can completely duplicate that software experience on whatever HDTVs we already own.

To fly, there has to be more to it than just software... or part of the plan has to involve killing off the TV as a standalone option to re-unify the exclusivity of an Apple software experience ONLY being available on a piece of Apple-branded hardware. As long as the software can be available in a separate box that delivers the exact same software-based benefits (and future software update benefits) to ANY brand of HDTV, the "what's special" element of the blend of hardware + software in an Apple product is significantly undermined.

IMO, I have no issue what-so-ever with a separate TV box vs. having it integrated into a Television set. I certainly wouldn't throw out my Samsung HDTV because I don't like the software experience being separated from the television set hardware. Again IMO, I don't have any issues with the esthetics of a separate little box nor is there much confusion in hooking a new one to an HDTV with just a single cable with ends that only fit one shape of port on that TV.

Even the suggestion that all TVs currently have crappy UI is weak. After the initial setup, do we really use our TVs UIs much anymore? At my house- for example- the Dish DVR box manages most of the programming we watch, an TV UI manages the rest. I hardly ever even use the TV's UI. Yes, it is not very good when I do use it but it's not such a terrible experience that I would jettison the HDTV I have for a better UI that I might almost never use.

----------



That's one way to solve the "bypass the middleman" issue. Launching satts means this can't possibly arrive in the next few years. Buying one of the existing players- probably DISH- is the shortcut (but that's only a U.S.-centric solution) and I bet it couldn't get approved, integrated, and ("it just) work"ing by even 2015 if they purchased today.

Yes, Apple makes their money from hardware, and not software. But what makes them successful is their software. I wasn't saying that the hardware would be irrelevant, it will need to be tied to the software, and could not be done with a separate set-top box (or at least Apple would not want to do this and consumers would not be willing to pay as much for a little box as they would for a full Apple designed television), however the hardware would not need changes very often.

I don't want to have to go out and buy a whole new TV as much as the next guy (I already have a nice HDTV), but if Apple can revolutionize the offering of content and give users features they have been wanting in a TV for years, then I may strongly consider it.

 

[cpucrash0]

so how will apple do this with some stores being inside shopping mall's ? so people are going to have to carry a big screen tv down the stairs and through the mall and to the parking lot to where your car is at? That seems like a lot of trouble or is someone inside the apple store going to carry the tv for you to your car? I don't even think apple will make a tv and if they do it's going to fail because of the high price tag and not many features that all the other tv's include like more then one HDMi port. And I don't see many wanting to pay over 5k dollars for a tv that the other manufacture would be selling tv's with more features for less and with more HDMi ports..

 

[Apple Key]

so how will apple do this with some stores being inside shopping mall's ? so people are going to have to carry a big screen tv down the stairs and through the mall and to the parking lot to where your car is at? That seems like a lot of trouble or is someone inside the apple store going to carry the tv for you to your car? I don't even think apple will make a tv and if they do it's going to fail because of the high price tag and not many features that all the other tv's include like more then one HDMi port. And I don't see many wanting to pay over 5k dollars for a tv that the other manufacture would be selling tv's with more features for less and with more HDMi ports..

It can't really be that different from carrying a 27" iMac or a 30" Cinema display from an Apple Store. People will find a way, or they can order from the website if they don't feel like carrying it out themselves. Also, I think Apple employees are willing to help people if they need it.

 

[kf90210]

For all the arguments regarding software upgradability etc... what about the fact that maybe it won't use the same iOS as found on an iPad/iPhone/iPod but one similar to the one on Apple TV (which is just a variation of iOS)?

As well, the ARM processors (which will most likely be used in the TVs) are getting to the point where they are powerful enough both in terms of processing power and graphical performance that they can probably handle multiple iterations of iOS before becoming obsolete.

The point I'm trying to make is that it won't be so cut and dry as some of the posters here seem to make it. The allure of owning the next new Apple product and just the fact that it's an Apple product itself will inevitably drive initial sales.

I think the biggest front Apple will move on is how it will change the content delivery method as opposed to how it will all work out in terms of hardware.

 

[portishead]

I wish Apple would make a TiVo device that allows you to also export shows in HD and maybe something to edit out commercials. It would also have apple tv functionality built in to purchase/rent shows from iTunes.

The problem is getting the studios on board and licensing problems for exporting shows.

I don't think apple needs to make a television but I'm curious to see what they do. I'm dying for apple to make some sort of htpc!

 

[marcusj0015]

Will it be 4K, and 3D? if so, I'm totally onboard.

In related news, I think the TV will have a Thunderbolt port to allow the lpayback of blu-ray rips and DVR content.

 

[herkamer]

barking up the wrong tree

I don't think it makes sense for Apple to release a video unit.

People like their DVRs, but "whole house" dvrs are clunky, much less DVRs that work on your phone or iPad. Apple would never make a whole house HDD DVRs because everything is about the "cloud" for them now and because DVRs suck advertising revenue. So instead they'll offer a subscription service that gives you the same experience on something similar to current ATVs.

This way, current AppleTVs really only need three things to get them in line with Apple's entertainment business model.

1. The ability of the device to monitor what you're watching on TV in order to offer purchase recommendations based on your viewing habits.
2. This would lead into some sort of subscription based service that will allow you to watch TV on demand without the need for cableTV.
3. Both of those abilities will blend across IOS devices to eclipse the current netflix streaming service.

oh, and stick a camera on it.

 

[fabian9]

so how will apple do this with some stores being inside shopping mall's ? so people are going to have to carry a big screen tv down the stairs and through the mall and to the parking lot to where your car is at? That seems like a lot of trouble or is someone inside the apple store going to carry the tv for you to your car?

This made me laugh.

Yes, I'm sure they won't release a TV, because people are too lazy to carry it to their cars.