Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Unveil Television Set Operating System at WWDC?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What are the chances this apple tv will be a projector?
that's what I think my next display device will be, unless this announcement will be something huge
that's what I think my next display device will be, unless this announcement will be something huge
You've had the option of very powerful universal remotes, ie Logitech Harmony, for quite some time.
First of all I really think it's curious that you advocate your model of piracy driven media consumption as the future. Yes, I also torrent US pay TV series, as the German sync usually sucks. But OTOH I mostly buy those shows (like TrueBlood, Dexter etc) on BluRay as soon as they arrive (better for my Karma).
Second you (and many others) still seem to have a problem in realizing that there really are people on this planet who spend a lot of money on their HTS and actually use proper 5.1 or 7.1 audio systems.
I need a TV for displaying video - so it has to be nothing more but also nothing less than a nice panel. My current TV is set to HDMI-input as anything goes through the AVR. I just need the display, no software, nu other stuff.
And my buying decision will be to choose the best panel - and give a fat rat's back about the 'software' on the TV.
Why is everyone so focused on the HARDWARE? The iPhone revolution was a little about hardware (the touch screen - which already existed but was being used to move a mouse pointer around on a phone), but more about SOFTWARE which created the new way to use this touchscreen.
This will be the same with the new Apple TV.
How much better can a TV's interface get? Can you imagine 'pinching' the screen, and instantly seeing all 1,000 channels on the screen as little tiny tv sets, then pointing to one to change the channel? Things like this are not done in today's world. Any time you go to a friend's house, the remote is different, and the interface is different. And none are that good. The simplest 'interface' is the Tivo, but that hasn't been improved since the late 1990s.
This will be the same with the new Apple TV.
How much better can a TV's interface get? Can you imagine 'pinching' the screen, and instantly seeing all 1,000 channels on the screen as little tiny tv sets, then pointing to one to change the channel? Things like this are not done in today's world. Any time you go to a friend's house, the remote is different, and the interface is different. And none are that good. The simplest 'interface' is the Tivo, but that hasn't been improved since the late 1990s.
Less than zero, if that were possible.
I would love to cut out cable completely, but it just isn't feasible for my viewing habits.
I would imagine you're in the small minority with how you view content, and that minority segment isn't really the target for the majority of content providers.
I find this highly unlikely, apple announces products that they currently aren't in a market for months before release in order to grab that 3rd party support.
I agree about advertising, however, commercials are the reason that TV has been free since it's inception. Up until pay cable. Someone we have to pay for the content. One way or another.
----------
Better than I imagined. This is great because it just might allow Apple's devise to eventually be used of any further TV. Obviously many of use would love Apples version but can you imagine if their interface because the high standard for everyones "monitor?
TV manufacturers, cable companies, and networks are not interested in helping Apple get deeper into the television game in any effective way. They've seen what happens when Apple gets a foothold in a new market and they aren't interested in giving up 30% of share, 30% of revenues, 30% of anything. I'd be surprised if any of them are going to allow Apple to dictate an API control protocol or anything else.
I don't think this rumor has legs.
I don't think this rumor has legs.
I absolutely know what you mean, but then again people said they didn't want more then just the calling + messaging ability on a mobile phones, back on years when they just started to show up with cameras. And look at mobile phone industry now and how much it has changed. My point is... anything is possible.
I understand you comments however, look at the record/music biz. The screwed themselves out of writing their own ticket when Napster first appeared but with out APple and iTunes, they would be even deader. Yes the bitch about Apply but Apple has kept them going for at least the past decade.
I am not advocating anything for anyone. I am simply telling you what works for me and my family. I don't believe in Karma.
I don't really care what your set up is for your viewing and listening pleasure. That is not my problem or the problem of many others. You choose your stuff that makes you happy.
It reads like there are some anger issues. I suggest some deep breathing exercises or maybe go for a nice relaxing walk.
Be well.
Thank you! I think you hit the nail on the head here. People replace their computers, phones, iPods, iPads, gadgets, heck even TV components much more frequently than they replace TV sets themselves.
Are we *set* they are building a TV? Maybe this is all a next generation, blow-them-out-of-the-water Apple TV set?
Um it's pretty much June so the year is already halfway over let's get this show on the road please, less talk more releasing...
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
The difference is that the music industry was on it's knees. They practically HAD to go with anything that might bridge the way to new digital revenue streams. Apple's option "just worked". Ask them how happy they are TODAY to have put themselves so deeply under Apple's thumb and you'll better understand why many other players (like Amazon) get better pricing, etc from them. Now they are desperate to try to get out from under Apple's hold over their business.
The movie & TV and cable industries are not on their knees. And they've seen first hand what happens when you "help" Apple gain domination over a market. They have no intention of duplicating what happened to their music industry cousins.
Even if Apple can somehow get the production side to play ball, any Apple solution still depends on the distribution (broadband) pipe. Who owns that pipe? Aren't they also in the video distribution business? If you have an alternative option for broadband (you're lucky), aren't they also in the video distribution business? Why are the owners of the pipes going to allow Apple to take their lucrative subscription businesses when Apple's "magical" alternative will have to flow through those very same pipes?
The long-term missing rumor that makes all of this "new television model" go is some way to link Apple to us DIRECTLY. It won't fly while we have to depend on video on Apple servers having to reach us through broadband pipes owned by cable & communications companies who are also in the video subscription business.
Comcast is currently getting blasted for its Xfinity IPTV service on the XBox 360 by Netflix. The Comcast service doesn't use any of your bandwidth, while Netflix does, using the same pipes.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
So, there's more than one way for Comcast to go here. Look no further than AT&T & Verizon with "unlimited data". If anyone else's alternative video subscription model start's threatening Comcast's video business while using Comcast's pipes, the cost of broadband will just go up for these "heavy bandwidth users"... exactly as unlimited cellular fades (or is priced up) for "heavier users."
The precedent is already in place. The Gov did nothing about it. Rinse & repeat (here).
The precedent is already in place. The Gov did nothing about it. Rinse & repeat (here).
Last edited:
I think there will be an Apple special event sometime this summer to introduce the new Mac line and WWDC will focus on iOS6, OSX Mountain Lion and perhaps as part of iOS6, announce an AppleTV (the existing AppleTV) API that developers can start building apps for.
When Apple is ready to announce the tv, they'll already have an ecosystem of apps ready to be ported over to a more powerful and feature rich hardware. Apple can monitor the release of these apps and approach individual developers that they think could tap into an Apple TV set's unique features.
Well they did it with the iphone, no? They will just find providers like att to offer it, and when people beg to buy it and see how successful it is, everyone will have to offer it.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
So you're happy with AT&T's cost of 3G/4G when others can get the same bandwidth for about half the cost of the iPhone's version? If so, then sure, Apple can partner with the likes of Comcast, etc to make their "cable killer" option go and Comcast can then offer an AT&T-like (high) pricing plan so that any cable revenue lost is made up on the higher broadband fees for this
TV deal. That yielded huge contract revenues for AT&T while allowing them to pinch the plan whenever they like. Who lost? We consumers pay up for the phone and the higher (relative) price of service for the phone. Who will lose if this happens? We consumers will pay up for the higher (relative) price of service IF Comcast, etc would even allow Apple's TV service to eat into their own TV service while Apple depends on getting to flow the Apple replacement solution through their pipes.Don't get me wrong. I love the DREAM of it. I just easily see the obvious flaw. All you have to ask yourself is why would Comcast, etc allow Apple's solution to eat their lunch when Comcast, etc owns the broadband pipes on which Apple's alternative would depend? Relative to the AT&T insinuation, this is very different. AT&T saw the big revenue potential so clearly they bought out Cingular (with which Apple had originally partnered). For AT&T, the iPhone offered huge contract revenues. An iPhone-like TV equivalent won't look the same from Comcast's, etc perspective. They like their video subscription revenues AND their broadband revenues. They definitely don't want to become just a "dumb pipe" (broadband-only player).
Last edited:
Subsidized TV *shudder*
Apple didn't change the cell phone model (like we were hoping they would) people, typically, don't buy their TV from a provider. They rent a STB (cable).
I am not saying it isn't possible, but I would think it unlikely that Comcast et al would be willing to subsidize a television set (at a higher cost to them vs a STB).