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

Apple Television Set Prototypes Reportedly 'In the Works'

I'll believe it when I see it....I strongly believe that in order for a full-fledged apple TV set to be successful, it needs to play nice in the home-theater environment. That means HDMI, Cable/satellite/OTA support (coax type F and otherwise), etc.

Home AV has been made relatively hassle-free with the advent of HDMI; Nearly all new sources support it and it's a simple matter of "Plug it in and go". Even Home theater receivers are much more user friendly with auto-calibration and oodles of HDMI ports. If apple decided they're going to turn everything on it's head and introduce new, proprietary, and expensive methods of accessing content we're already getting with our current (albiet a little less streamlined) methods, they're going to alienate a lot of people who already have a lot invested in home theater....and scare off a lot of the "I just want a flatscreen and want it to work" crowd (The kind that gets their TV from Walmart, Target, or BestBuy) with the hefty price tag. That just leaves the apple fanclub, and that leaves us with yet another "Hobby" product.
 
I also wonder if Apple can out-TiVo TiVo. I have gotten used to the TiVo recording suggestions based on things that I like or dislike. It is a great way of getting to see shows that I may not have chosen to watch normally.
 
antman2x2 said:
If this 1800$ price is true....

Im sorry but 1800 dollars is RIDICULOUS for a TV nowadays. Honestly I could go to best buy and buy a 37" samsung or LG LED HDTV for like 999$

Seriously, I understand the computers coming at a premium but a TV is a TV and for 1800$ people are GOING to look elsewhere.
Click to expand...

antman2x2 and others in 2007 before introduction of the iPhone:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'm sorry but $200 and actually requiring a $30 a month data plan is RIDICULOUS for a phone nowadays. Honestly I could go to best buy and get a motorola razr v3 flip phone for free and no one wants to browse the internet on a phone so why would you want to pay for a data plan?

Seriously, I understand the computers coming at a premium but a phone is a phone and for $200 up front and an extra $30 a month on your phone bill, people are GOING to look elsewhere."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story: Wait for the whole story before you make assumptions. Hardly anyone paid $200 up front and 2 year contracts with expensive data plans for flip phones before the iPhone because frankly the phones and the experiences they provided weren't worth it. Now hundreds of millions of people do.

We don't know what the deal is going to be or how much better this service is going to be compared to traditional tv. And I do emphasize service because obviously Apple isn't planning on just selling a TV. They will be selling a complete end to end service from hardware to software to content. And this could mean some type of subsidy on the tv purchase with a content subscription or maybe the tv purchase itself gives you the content. We really don't know what they plan to offer or how they plan to package it.
 
pewra said:
That's a lot of random numbers from an "analyst".

Especially for a device that probably doesn't exist, and most certainly doesn't have a price or audience yet.
Click to expand...

Once you get past the disgust of pulling things from your rearward orifice, each additional number makes no difference.
 
The problem here is not the TV itself. It is the product range.

In the 90's Apple sold a million products and Jobs cut them down to 4 main categories. And it worked.

Fast forward to today and we have:
iPods, iPads, iPhones, iMacs, Mac Minis, Mac Pros, MBPs, MBA's etc etc.

Is Apple making their product line too large again? Should they have a concise range but make each product in it the best? This is the question I am asking. And there is no Jobs to say "Kill that product cause we have too many already".

Personally for the above reasons I stated I think Apple should not enter the TV market. And secondly I'm not willing to pay more for a TV then I did for my i7 21.5 iMac. That feels just so wrong.
 
You're kidding, right?

Consumers don't have bottomless pocketbooks. Reduced price = increased subscribers. Volume trumps price increases when increases result in fewer subscribers.

Simple economics.


TallManNY said:
Why do people continually think something is a "great business model" because it results in things being cheaper for the consumer? Explain to me why the content providers should change their model to something that results in you sending them less money every month? Show me the model where you send more money to your cable company or to the network providers and then you might have a "great business model". Show me how they can raise the prices they charge to run adds, then you've got a "great business model." I'm not saying this can't be done, but suggesting that you should be able to buy just five channels of content and cut your monthly cable bill in half just doesn't make sense for the company receiving those checks.

For the record, I cut the cord on cable TV and just get free over the air HD. I get the basic channels, including plenty of NFL games on Sunday. But I still pay my cable provider for internet service, so they get a nice check from me every month.
Click to expand...
 
This will most certainly happen.

"Channels" will become apps - each of which are controlled by the content producers. They will house archived shows, show live shows, allow for interaction - whatever the application developer of that channel desires.

The "channels" will live among other general purpose and gaming apps. It's already happening with sports apps on the current Apple TV. Those didn't just randomly appear - they are controlled test cases.

Is it that hard to imagine? A-la-carte will reign supreme.
 
It's not going to be cheap, but that's not important. What's important is that it is likely to incorporate some design and usability elements which will get picked up by other manufacturers and all TVs will improve in turn.

I can imagine sitting in front of my Apple TV set, with my iPad on my lap.
I can see the full listings on my iPad, and can use it to change channel.
And I can record whatever I want using the PVR functionality.
And I can connect it to the internet to watch catchup programmes from whichever catchup service I want (BBC iPlayer, Channel 4's 4OD, etc.).
And if I'm not at home, I can set it to record something from wherever I am via my iDevice.
And if I want to watch something either live or that I've recorded while someone else is using the TV set, I can connect my iPad to it via my home wifi and go and watch in another room.
And I can download content to my iPad to take with me.
And I can rent films and TV, or buy them, via iTunes.
And browse the internet.
And use Facetime.
And iMessage.
And share what I'm watching via Facebook or Twitter.
And access stuff on my iMac.
And show home videos and slideshows.

None of this is particularly new or clever. All of it is currently possible. But not in one device, with one intuitive and graphical remote control, and the simplicity and elegance that Apple seem to manage to bring to so many of their designs.

So if that's expensive, I'm not sure I care. After all, it would cost plenty to buy all of the gear to do all of this now. I'll wait until I can afford it and buy it then.

Tiptopp
 
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)

Maybe apple wants to join TiVo in the dvr business?

I love my TiVo though. There are a lot of mediocre cable company dvr boxes out there
 
What does Apple coming out with a whole TV set offer on top of what a set top box does right now ?

99$ Apple TV, plugs into any set and can do all the eco-system stuff.

1800$ Apple TV Set... what does this bring to the table above and beyond the 99$ box ?

Anyone have any ideas ?
 
SilianRail said:
The problem is that TVs are already simple and easy to use. Nobody is going to pay $2999 for a 50" Apple TV.
Click to expand...

I think you've really hit the nail on the head here. The high end TV market is awful for a manufacturer as there are virtually no margins on the TV's there (this was actually discussed on CNBC today).

It would be interesting to see what Apple is playing around with, but its not a market waiting for Apple and its normal margins - compared to taking one of these no margin Asian manufactured high end TV's and then adding an Apple TV for $99 and doing the same thing.

Apple makes prototypes of tons of things all the time, most of which never see the daylight of market.

It'll be interesting to see if anything happens on this rumor.
 
troop231 said:
I think it would be a great business model if you could just buy individual channels. I mean, there's only a handful of channels I like, why must the consumer be forced to buy all of the garbage channels.
Click to expand...

That basically exists: it's called iTunes.

(You don't watch EVERY show on those individual channels you like, do you? So why not go truly ala carte and just get the shows you want to watch.)
 
newagemac said:
Moral of the story: Wait for the whole story before you make assumptions. Hardly anyone paid $200 up front and 2 year contracts with expensive data plans for flip phones before the iPhone because frankly the phones and the experiences they provided weren't worth it. Now hundreds of millions of people do.
Click to expand...

Sorry I just find this amusing because I know a LOT of people who shelled out $600 + 2 yr contract for the first iPhone :p (And yea we got reimbursed $100 eventually)
 
KnightWRX said:
What does Apple coming out with a whole TV set offer on top of what a set top box does right now ?

99$ Apple TV, plugs into any set and can do all the eco-system stuff.

1800$ Apple TV Set... what does this bring to the table above and beyond the 99$ box ?

Anyone have any ideas ?
Click to expand...

So well put...and the high end TV market has almost no margins for the manufacturers (nothing like what Apple likes to do).
 
$1800 is a midrange quality LCD, the good 50" lcds start at around $2600. Add the apple tax and the picture quality wont be very good at just $1800. Good plasmas arent even that cheap.

I would rather Apple make a good local dimming LCD that competes with the high end TVs in picture quality, I would not buy an LCD that wasnt local dimming. Hopefully that price is way off, I can wait a year after release when TVs drop by $1000 to get an expensive but super high quality TV.
 
It's hard to tell whether TV's are already simple enough or not. If everything would be unified, coherent, no cable box, and basically all popular content of today, I do think there would be a market for this.

Imagine a world where you no longer had to wait for some TV channel in your country to air some show, and where you didn't even have to think of "channels" in the first place. You just chose which shows you wanted to see, and the line between TV show and movie was blurred. And all existing and future iOS apps on top of this. All this would be tied to your Apple ID.

There's a lot to improve today, but it's very hard to know how hard it will be for a company of the size and cash of Apple to actually make this "dream" come true. We're still living in an old world of TV where little have changed, so little that we don't even think there IS anything to change anymore. Despite still using almost the exact same format and way of consuming TV content since the black & white TV set was introduced in the early 1900's. Only more "channels", i.e. preconfigured sets of shows we have no influence in whatsoever, advertising that isn't targeted to what you are interested in, cable boxes, TV networks not being available where you live, and so on.

It's a complete mess, but we barely even recognize there is a mess because we are so used to it. We're used to swearing at shows forcing people to piracy because there is no deals written, and because there have been no interested third party in making everything unified and coherent.

A bit like the pre-iTunes era with fragmented "physical" record stores, or having to buy physical CD's where some guy at some studio had arranged the songs for you, with little interest in what you actually liked.

There is much to change for Apple, but I'm not sure they'll manage. The upside is that Apple are not unused to playing with very high stakes.
 
WesleyUden said:
Apple should buy Nintendo and integrate gaming into the tv system. Have an app store on the tv and release some blockbuster games on it and you've got the gaming industry and the television industry on lock.
Click to expand...

Why buy Nintendo when they can do that without them. I personally think Apple needs to just do a deal with the TV manufacturers to make them Airplay compatible. Then any iDevice could play games on them and display movies.
 
KnightWRX said:
What does Apple coming out with a whole TV set offer on top of what a set top box does right now ?

99$ Apple TV, plugs into any set and can do all the eco-system stuff.

1800$ Apple TV Set... what does this bring to the table above and beyond the 99$ box ?

Anyone have any ideas ?
Click to expand...

The same thing that an integrated hard drive brings to a laptop versus an external one. Simplicity.
 
the8thark said:
The problem here is not the TV itself. It is the product range.

In the 90's Apple sold a million products and Jobs cut them down to 4 main categories. And it worked.

Fast forward to today and we have:
iPods, iPads, iPhones, iMacs, Mac Minis, Mac Pros, MBPs, MBA's etc etc.

Is Apple making their product line too large again? Should they have a concise range but make each product in it the best?
Click to expand...

I'd say this was about as concise as you can get, if you want to cover the whole consumer market for music and media, telephony, mobile computing, professional computing, etc. So each of these products has a clear target market, doesn't it? Yes, there's beginning to be some overlap between iPad and MBA, for instance, but I'd say this range could quite easily be mapped out to the whole market place and you would see distinct differences between the product consumers. So adding a TV set might remove one of the uses of a mini (media centre) but doesn't replace anything else in the range.

Tiptopp
 
Also, people looking at technical details are totally missing the point. Apple's success haven't had much to do with tech specs. They've always been about the end user experience. People are rushing to stores right now for the iPhone 4S -- the iPhone with the same amount of RAM, with the same form factor, and the same screen size, as its predecessor. So don't focus too much on the LCD aspect of this, if the actual concept behind it will be mind blowing.
 
palmerc2 said:
I just bought a Samsung PN59D8000 (Plasma) that probably physically looks and performs bettert than a TV that apple could make in the next 3 years.

Apple: just work on the AppleTV3. Make it 1080p, and then I will buy one of your products in the TV world. No need to make your own set.
Click to expand...

+1
I wouldn't trade my Pana 50G20 for any fruit (or whatever) -branded LED.
Plus, 1080i/p is a must... and regarding TV programs, most of the time, streamed TV looks absolutely crappy compared to 1080i TNT (aka aerial digital 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