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

Apple should produce an Apple-branded HDTV plus an excellent sounds system.

ArrayDecay

ArrayDecay

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 21, 2019
363
542
Greater Seattle Area
Look, at the end of the day Apple is a hardware company. They need to produce a television + sound system that will permit users to watch what they want when they want. A system with an outstanding picture and exquisite sound. Somehow, all integrated with all devices. Make it indispensable.

That's what I hope they do.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: cateye
There has been rumors, going back to Aug 2004, IIRC, about Apple testing a TV.

Obviously, it still hasn’t happened, but the rumors come back every now and then.

The original rumor was about a 40” and 50” plasma, and the details have changed over the years, but basically the same, Apple testing a TV.

My guess is that the rumors were probably partially true, but maybe confusing the TV for Front Row, and the what we know as the 1st Gen Apple TV.

Maybe the rumors that popped up over the years was really about other Apple TV generations, or maybe false info to catch leakers.

Another note about TVs, the margins for them are super thin, so if Apple wanted to put their own TV on the market, it most likely would be price way higher than a comparable non-Apple brand if they kept their usual profit margins. They probably wouldn’t sell much.

Besides, the best thing that Apple could do to entice potential buyers would be a SW solution, which is already available in the form of an Apple TV and tvOS.
 
I doubt Apple would make a TV as there isn't much they can add to the experience to make it worth it to be able to charge a price with Apple sized margins. I could maybe see a device that combines Apple TV and HomePod functionality into some kind of sound bar, but Apple development has been slow so I won't hold by breath.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi and WebHead
ArrayDecay said:
Look, at the end of the day Apple is a hardware company. They need to produce a television + sound system that will permit users to watch what they want when they want. A system with an outstanding picture and exquisite sound. Somehow, all integrated with all devices. Make it indispensable.

That's what I hope they do.
Click to expand...
They already make exactly this, minus the TV panel. Plug in an Apple TV unit ($129) and stream everything through there, skipping whatever garbage UI it ships with. Next, add one or two* full-sized HomePods ($300-600) and boom, you're there. The Apple TV/HomePod combo handles the "exquisite sound" and the "integrated with all devices," while the TV panel you pick handles the "outstanding picture."

* They sound way better as a pair. I started off with one and finally added another recently, and it's a very noticable difference. Spatial Audio works as it should, and since there are two speakers they only each work half as hard to fill up the room. I actually have to have the "reduce bass" setting on most of the time to avoid bothering the upstairs neighbors -- but when they're away I let it rip and it's great.
 
Last edited:
What size? Not everyone wants only 1 size of television. So then, Apple needs to make multiple sizes to hit general target size ranges to please those who buy TVs. Where do they store all these big boxes? Where do they display all these space-eating TVs? Is any Apple store equivalent to a big box store with tons of free floor space for a good mix of televisions?

How do they buy the screen from LG or Samsung, put their big markup on it, and not have people opting for the exact same screen from LG or Samsung without Apple's big markup? There would be no difference at all in the screen- exactly the same screen quality. One would have an Apple logo and about a 40% profit on it. AppleTV + the LG or Samsung would likely deliver the exact same experience as AppleTV folded into an Apple Television. Speaking of which...

When the AppleTV built into the TV is made "vintage" by Apple decision-making, is this another "throw baby out with the bathwater" product? A good TV should easily last 10+ years. What product does Apple want to make that has 10+ years before it needs to be replaced and thus deliver more money to Apple? Or do we consumers want to be turning over whole TVs at Apple pricing every 5-7 (or so) years too? Speakers can easily last 10-20 or more years too but see HomePods for one possible clue about this one (first gen can't even synch up as a stereo pair with second generation).

Will this TV have a good mix of ports so it can also work with other sources? Or be locked down to only Apple sources and Apps where Apple is cut in for 15%-30%? If someone wants to connect a BD player, a game console, cable/satt, antenna, etc, will Apple allow that (and not get a cut of what people watch from those other sources)? Or will this be a significantly marked up screen that is also thoroughly locked down in terms of what can be watched? Again see HomePods for one possible clue about this one.

Need more... or getting the picture?

I get the core idea. I certainly believe Apple could make a beautiful television with a terrific interface. But modern Apple works at everything these days to harvest every possible nickel. I suspect there is no Apple television because the market is established at ultra-thin margins and even Apple didn't think that the logo could make all but the most passionate fans pay way up for the very same screen also available from LG or Samsung.

My guess is they would have to kill the standalone AppleTV to reduce the option of buying the "software" in that box to then use on the cheaper copy of the very same screen. That would be like making macOS or iOS able to run on PCs and Android. If either could, I suspect many would opt for other hardware and save the cost difference but enjoy the exact same software experiences.

My guess is they would roll out 1 size and that size would not scratch all itches, so only a segment of a segment could potentially see it as perfect for them.

My guess is too locked down vs. having a good mix of ports in support of getting lots of sources of video from channels where Apple wouldn't get any cut. See pretty much ALL other Apple stuff as examples of "walled garden."

And my guess is that all but the biggest fans would choose to save the approx. 35-37% by opting for the LG or Samsung copy of the exact same screen + an AppleTV for the very same "software." These people would then enjoy the added benefit of being able to upgrade the software with a new AppleTV for a hundred or so in approx. year 5-7 unlike the Apple Television buyers who would get to upgrade by replacing the entire television... likely tossing a perfectly good screen because the "computing" guts were made obsolete by corporate busine$$ decision$. 💰💰
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: uczcret, hobowankenobi and Jhonjhon236
Can you imagine watching your Apple TV content on your Apple TV app on your Apple TV powered by the Apple TV?
 
Canyda said:
Can you imagine watching your Apple TV content on your Apple TV app on your Apple TV powered by the Apple TV?
Click to expand...
Knowing Apple, they would make one without any ports, including an HDMI input. Anything that you want to play from an external device would have to be AirPlayed.

Kind of like the TV version of the HomePod.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl
Apple has said something along the lines of—they don’t get involved in a new product category unless they can make it significantly better in a way that only Apple can. I don’t know how Apple can make a TV significantly better than what already exists. Adding an Apple logo to a TV then combining the ATV set top box and HomePod speakers into it won’t make anything better, only worse in my opinion. It would just be combining things for the sake of it. My HomePods are set away from my TV for stereo separation, and they look good. I only use my ATV UI, never the TV software. And the set top box is inconspicuous and basically invisible inside the TV stand.
Combining wouldn’t add anything good that I can see, but it would take away stereo separation, and modularity (requiring a complete unit replacement instead of being able to replace/upgrade display, speakers, or brains separately).
 
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi and Juicy Box
There's no doubt Apple can build a design-forward 4k HDTV at three standard sizes (good, better, best) with much better built-in speakers and a space age matching remote (that's not quite as functional as a standard remote). However, then what? Hardware sourcing is not the problem with this product.

It's all about the content.

The content industry is fragmented and fighting among itself. Disney, Warner, Sony and Universal are pulling back on streaming and re-focusing on theaters again because the revenue from streaming is not there (Who would have thought letting people subscribe for a month to ALL of your content for $9.99 and then letting them cancel after 30 days would not be a sound business decision in the long run?).

There's also the issue of not having a "hero" feature. Walter Issacson confirmed years ago that Steve Jobs told him they were working on a TV. They have it. It's done. It's sitting on a shelf somewhere waiting for the spotlight to be placed on it.

But what's the "hero" feature? TvOS is not there yet. It's convoluted, requires too much authentication/work for the average user to activate their channels, gaming on the platform is a joke and HomeKit/Matter is mess.

Until Apple can provide a "hero" feature for an Apple TV, it will continue to sit on the shelf.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ArrayDecay
dwfaust said:
Apple, the king of profit margins, will never enter a market with the kind of margins the flat screen television market has... way too cut-throat with minimal margins... not a game that Timmy and his minions are willing to play.
Click to expand...

I actually disagree with this. If ANYONE can, it's Apple. They'll charge $2499+ for these HDTVs and ship them directly to the consumer.

It's about the content and not having a killer feature to release it.
 
What you want is a TV upgrade program akin to those used with phones... subscribe to Comcast for $199 a month and get a new TV and sound system every 3 years... for "free".

The rest of us will continue to use the same cheap TV with annoying LED line running through the picture until it eventually dies. We're environmentally friendly because we don't replace things very often.
 
pmiles said:
What you want is a TV upgrade program akin to those used with phones... subscribe to Comcast for $199 a month and get a new TV and sound system every 3 years... for "free".

The rest of us will continue to use the same cheap TV with annoying LED line running through the picture until it eventually dies. We're environmentally friendly because we don't replace things very often.
Click to expand...
I’m still using the plasma that I purchased in 2007. Been thinking about upgrading, which was the germ of this post.
 
I really dont see the point of them doing this... and I suspect they never will.

Why enter a market thats saturated with many, many other great options and all price points?

I love the AppleTV interface and its my only TV service and my TV itself is nothing more than a monitor to the AppleTV as I couldn't care less about the TV's own 'smart' features and apps.

They simply wouldnt sell enough units to make it worthwhile.
People dont change and upgrade their TVs on a whim and for most they are quite happy with their TV. Its the main reason why Sky Glass fell behind in the UK as people didnt want to have to change their entire TV for a baked in service which, should they stop paying the SKY subscription, would end up severely disabled. Sky have since relented and are now selling the stand-along set top box puck solution to Sky Stream, and I suspect this is far more attractive to customers than having to replace a TV to access Sky.

The AppleTV has mass market appeal, and would sell to far more people than an entire TV with TVOS built in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonnyBlaze
ArrayDecay said:
Look, at the end of the day Apple is a hardware company. They need to produce a television + sound system that will permit users to watch what they want when they want. A system with an outstanding picture and exquisite sound. Somehow, all integrated with all devices. Make it indispensable.

That's what I hope they do.
Click to expand...
No doubt that Apple is fully capable of doing what you say but then again, they charge a premium that most would not pay. Perhaps if they take their "reality" goggles and set them up with 4k and great headphones, you could get that immersive experience. Typical TV with good sound requires multiple speakers and more. At best, Apple could use their pods or a soundbar but it would be a step up but not anything similar to what we see now.
 
I don’t think there is much Apple can do when it comes to TV technology that will make it a must-have and so make everyone ditch their current TVs and upgrade regularly.

What Apple can do is make peripherals like tv and HomePods a must-have. The tv interface is already better than others I have seen and used, but can be a lot better with more features and benefits to make it a must-have.

Then make HomePods a must-have by adding as many as you want to enhance the surround sound that you can afford (like Sonos) and make a subwoofer.
 
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