Apple Television Set Prototypes Reportedly 'In the Works'

[alent1234]

Smart tv's are an emerging market. Why use iTunes when your tv will have Netflix and other services built in along with applications? Why buy idevices if you don't need iTunes?

iPhone came out approximately 30 years after the first cell phones came out

Ok, so I have read through 12 pages of posts on this topic, and I still don't see any compelling reason why it would be in Apple's interest to get into the screen-making (or re-branding) business based on current display technology.

All of the improvements described could be achieved with an upgrade to the existing AppleTV set top box, connected to a screen of your choosing.

If you look back at Apple's killer products of the last 5 years, they have been wildly successful at introducing category-defining products into immature markets.

The iPod defined the immature mp3 player market. iTunes defined the immature online mp3 sales market. The iPhone defined the immature smartphone market. The iPad defined the non-existent tablet computer market.

The problem with the market for TV sets is that it is the most mature market in the technology industry. The Sony's, Pioneers and Panasonics of this world already produce fantastic mature products and have done for years. I'm sure Apple could produce a very nice looking set as good as these guys, but they are never going to be able to define this market in the same way that they did with iPods, iPhones and iPads, and there is no way they are going to be able to convince consumers to upgrade their television sets every 18 months.

Basically, I think that Apple would be much much better off investing in improving the current AppleTV set-top box product (where we have yet to see a category defining product - from Apple or anyone else) than becoming a bit-part player in the television set business.

 

[Widashy]

Ok, so I have read through 12 pages of posts on this topic, and I still don't see any compelling reason why it would be in Apple's interest to get into the screen-making (or re-branding) business based on current display technology.

All of the improvements described could be achieved with an upgrade to the existing AppleTV set top box, connected to a screen of your choosing.

If you look back at Apple's killer products of the last 5 years, they have been wildly successful at introducing category-defining products into immature markets.

The iPod defined the immature mp3 player market. iTunes defined the immature online mp3 sales market. The iPhone defined the immature smartphone market. The iPad defined the non-existent tablet computer market.

The problem with the market for TV sets is that it is the most mature market in the technology industry. The Sony's, Pioneers and Panasonics of this world already produce fantastic mature products and have done for years. I'm sure Apple could produce a very nice looking set as good as these guys, but they are never going to be able to define this market in the same way that they did with iPods, iPhones and iPads, and there is no way they are going to be able to convince consumers to upgrade their television sets every 18 months.

Basically, I think that Apple would be much much better off investing in improving the current AppleTV set-top box product (where we have yet to see a category defining product - from Apple or anyone else) than becoming a bit-part player in the television set business.

I think this "Apple HDTV" is definitely not about how it would have a Super HD Resolution or the display or anything for that matter. It's about ecosystem nowadays, a family with iPhones, iPods, iPads, Mac would benefit from this HDTV. You are right that TV industry(or HDTV) is one of the most mature industries on the planet but Apple is just making it easier.
I basically take all these rumors, from now on, with a grain of salt but the so called Apple HDTV is definitely coming after iPhone 5(?) (read 2013). A very long time I guess, although I'm not on topic but, like always, I would like Apple to jump into the Console gaming Market.

 

[macforumsguest]

That's one butt ugly TV for a prototype

This pic is any regular TV with Apple TV box connected to it.
The one that is speculated to be introduced doesnt have any pics out yet

 

[Sackvillenb]

Man... I would so like to see that prototype...

I still think apple would be better off making a much better apple tv box (like their existing one, but much more feature rich) than making an actual apple television...

 

[TomP80]

Smart tv's are an emerging market.

I don't think that "Smart TV's" are actually a market. The real emerging market is IPTV - internet based content delivered to your lounge room.

"Smart TV" is the the television-set industry (Samsung, Sony etc) response to try and dominate this emerging market. These companies are first and foremost screen-makers, and are (badly) adding limited IP content to their pre-existing products.

There is no reason why Apple should follow this model. It just doesn't make sense.

If Apple wants to dominate the IPTV market, then it needs to concentrate harder on making the existing AppleTV product into a real category defining product - not a hobby.

And to do this, they will need to take some of their own advice and "think different".

Trying to shoe-horn the closed, walled-garden, user-pays-for-everything-on-the-iTunes-store-and-nowhere-else business model has not and will not work for IPTV.

I think they need to throw out all concepts of how the current AppleTV business model works, and start from the ground up. A couple of basic suggestions that they could implement right now with the current AppleTV 2 hardware:

1. Enable 3rd party apps
2. Enable these 3rd party apps to control the usb port in whatever use they want.

Imagine the possibilities - DVRs, external hard drives, game controllers, kinect control, webcams and microphones etc.

In my opinion, the revenue that Apple would gain through a 30% share of full functioned AppleTV apps would vastly dwarf the revenue gained from sale of the AppleTV hardware itself.

To be honest, if they can afford to sell the current ATV2 for $99, i am pretty sure they could afford to give away a full-featured ATV3 both to consumers and to existing TV-set manufacturers (who would jump at the change to integrate one of these into their products) for free. Now that really would create a category defining product.

 

[divinox]

Honestly, i think Apple will use both Siri AND Kinect like gestures.

Wouldn't that make Apple a thief? I mean, thats MSFT's innovation? (Kinect does voice already). Shouldn't they have exclusive rights to it? Isn't that how things work around here?



Oh snap, i forgot, Apple is on the other side of the fence this time.

 

[KnightWRX]

It's about ecosystem nowadays, a family with iPhones, iPods, iPads, Mac would benefit from this HDTV.

Why limit it to Apple branded TV ? If it's really about the eco-system, they could make something kind of like this that plugs into every TV out there instead, and have a much broader reach with their eco-system :

Remember guys, if Apple is going to make a full on TV set, not just a set top box, it means they are bringing something to the table that the little 99$ box can't do on its own without full control of the display itself.

 

[adder7712]

Honestly, i think Apple will use both Siri AND Kinect like gestures.

Wouldn't that conflict with Kinect if you have an Xbox 360 with Kinect hooked up to this hypothetical Apple TV?

 

[jettredmont]

Wouldn't that conflict with Kinect if you have an Xbox 360 with Kinect hooked up to this hypothetical Apple TV?

No reason they would interfere with one another. The Kinect dot array creates a lot of light noise, but a spectrum filter would remove that. No reason that Apple would need to use the same frequencies of light and the same approach to detecting motion (is the Kinect dot array controlled by Kinect, or is it passive? If passive, AppleTV could even just "piggyback" on that dot array if they absolutely had to use the same frequencies).