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

Best Buy Dreams Up a $1499 42-Inch 'Apple HDTV' for Customer Feedback

I write the logic for such surveys (not this particular survey, I hasten to add) - there is EVERY chance that different users get shown a different price and or different subset of features for the product in an attempt to understand what consumers would be willing to pay for the product and what features impact the price they're willing to pay.

So reading anything into this would be a mistake.
 
trip1ex said:
Or pay $89 for an ATV.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

As has been posted over and over, there must be something more to an Apple Television than just software-based advantages that could be packaged in a $99 set-top box. Siri can be in a next-gen :apple:TV. The cable killer video subscription package can be delivered to ANY television in a next-gen :apple:TV. If there is a hypothetical HDTV coming from Apple, it needs something more than just the software... assuming that the same software will be delivered in a next-gen :apple:TV (that will then turn ANY television into one that can have the EXACT same software-based experience as this one with an Apple logo on it. A next-gen :apple:TV also facilitates users getting to choose whatever type of TV they want (LCD vs. LED vs. Plasma vs. DSP), whatever SIZE they want, whatever colors, shapes, remote type, what input ports they want/need, what price they want, etc.

---- AND ----

For those shocked at BB's guess at an Apple price, please note: BB is also implying that THE remote for this device is an iPhone or an iPad. While many of us here might have one or the other so we don't see that as an expensive asterisk ("remote not included; uses an iPhone or iPad as remote"), the mass market will not necessarily view this the same way.

And keep in mind that even if you believe the mass market for this television is likely to already have at least 1 iPhone or iPad in the household, those mobile devices would then need to be left at home when their owner hits the road... except in cases where that owner lives alone. Else, the rest of the family will be pretty unhappy when someone takes the TV controller with them when they leave the home.

"But apple will include a simple remote too". Great! Then the person who took the "good" remote with them will deal with the unhappy family. If an iPad or iPhone end up as the principle remote for this hypothetical device, not only does that increase the total cost by the cost of those iDevices but it also almost demands that one of those get dedicated to being the IMmobile iDevice to be left at home at all times.

This Apple Television rumor is such a mess in so many ways.
 
Last edited:
Matkar said:
you people that say that 1500 is too expensive.... You should go to a store and see how much a GOOD tv nowadays cost... I mean, totally respectable if you dont want to drop that much cash on a TV, but only crappy TVS cost 600-700 dollars...1500 for a 42 seems quite cheap considering all that I expec it to have...
Click to expand...

Not true. I bought a pretty decent Panasonic Plasma 54" 1080p 600Hz for $1099 in 2009. Panasonic is not a cheapo brand. This past Christmas, I saw even better deals. Don't go by MSRP. TVs typically sell for hundreds below MSRP.
 
I think it would be cool if there was like "upgradeability"
And when a new model comes out you slide out the old apple tv box/computer and slide in the new one (Like a battery, but the apple TV slide out part would be like a scaled down mac mini?)
 
You guys realize this is just BB hypothesising just as any of us could. They don't know any more than the rest of us. But they probably want to judge demand to help them prepare in case Apple does come to them with such a product.
 
Matkar said:
you people that say that 1500 is too expensive.... You should go to a store and see how much a GOOD tv nowadays cost... I mean, totally respectable if you dont want to drop that much cash on a TV, but only crappy TVS cost 600-700 dollars...1500 for a 42 seems quite cheap considering all that I expec it to have...
Click to expand...

Well, I do not know how it is in US, but down here in Switzerland there are Sony 40" TV sets available for 600-700 USD. No 3D obviously, but still...
 
tuna said:
What a joke. Yes I can imagine playing Angry Birds on a TV. If Apple won't let me do it on a ~$100 AppleTV accessory, Google is going to let me do it on a similarly prices Android device!

No I cannot imagine spending $1500 on a 42" Apple designed TV. You can buy a high-end name-brand 42" 1080p panel for under $600 without shopping too hard.
Click to expand...

Or you could just use a PS3. No "high-end name brand" 42" would sell quite that low unless it was black Friday.
 
This is the dumbest and most unimaginative thing I've read in a long time. There is a reason why Best Buy doesn't design the products they sell. Best Buy needs to stick to restocking the shelves and counting down the drawers each evening.
 
skier777 said:
Apple will find a way to sue best buy over this.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Unless BB violated an NDA Apple have a hard time wining a lawsuit over the survey.

OTOH, Apple could use BB to test the waters and still deny any such product exists, is planned, or is under consideration.
 
HobeSoundDarryl said:
Exactly.

As has been posted over and over, there must be something more to an Apple Television than just software-based advantages that could be packaged in a $99 set-top box. Siri can be in a next-gen :apple:TV. The cable killer video subscription package can be delivered to ANY television in a next-gen :apple:TV. If there is a hypothetical HDTV coming from Apple, it needs something more than just the software... assuming that the same software will be delivered in a next-gen :apple:TV (that will then turn ANY television into one that can have the EXACT same software-based experience as this one with an Apple logo on it. A next-gen :apple:TV also facilitates users getting to choose whatever type of TV they want (LCD vs. LED vs. Plasma vs. DSP), whatever SIZE they want, whatever colors, shapes, remote type, what input ports they want/need, what price they want, etc.

---- AND ----

For those shocked at BB's guess at an Apple price, please note: BB is also implying that THE remote for this device in an iPhone or an iPad. While many of us here might have one or the other so we don't see that as an expensive asterisk ("remote not included; uses an iPhone or iPad as remote"), the mass market will not necessarily view this the same way.

And keep in mind that even if you believe the mass market for this television is likely to already have at least 1 iPhone or iPad in the household, those mobile devices would then need to be left at home when their owner hits the road... except in cases where that owner lives alone. Else, the rest of the family will be pretty unhappy when someone takes the TV controller with them when they leave the home.

"But apple will include a simple remote too". Great! Then the person who took the "good" remote with them will deal with the unhappy family. If an iPad or iPhone end up as the principle remote for this hypothetical device, not only does that increase the total cost by the cost of those iDevices but it also almost demands that one of those get dedicated to being the IMmobile iDevice to be left at home at all times.

This Apple Television rumor is such a mess in so many ways.
Click to expand...
An iPod touch would serve just as well and be cheaper than either an iPhone or iPad.
 
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/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)

For a plasma, perhaps. LED? No thanks.
 
Biscuit411 said:
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/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)

For a plasma, perhaps. LED? No thanks.
Click to expand...
Plasma TV's are cheaper than true LED TVs.
True LED TVs cost a fortune.

LED backlit LCD's are complete garbage.
 
To all the people saying that $1500 is to much for a 42" TV are crazy. If you are spending less then that (minus sales or wholesalers), then you bought a crap TV. The only places you can buy a 42" or larger top spec'd TV for under that much would be at Costco or the like. The great TV's from Samsung are double that. The best brand to buy that will get you a 47" LED 120Hz 3D for under $1500 would be LG. If Apple has these specs or above on their TV, i'm guessing a 42" will go for for $1200 and the 47" will go for $1500, ect.. ect...
 
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