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.
Brightcove CEO Envisions His Dream Apple Television and Set-Top Box
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well it would be extremely foolish to build a TV only for tech savvy users. And pretty much polar opposite to the principle that previous iOS devices have been built on.
I honestly don't see Siri on a tv being anything more than a niche feature for most. For your normal everyday watching the good old remote control is a much better input method.
However I do see it being beneficial for certain situations.
What I am ready, willing and able to pay for now and on a monthly basis is good content.
At some point when my tvs breakdown, you betcha I will be looking around for what best suits my needs, an Apple TV sounds great.
I refuse to pay for bundles of unreliable, high priced junk. Right now I want, need good choices at a fair price.
At some point when my tvs breakdown, you betcha I will be looking around for what best suits my needs, an Apple TV sounds great.
I refuse to pay for bundles of unreliable, high priced junk. Right now I want, need good choices at a fair price.
Might not need it if the equipment is in the open- the Harmony Link magically bounces IR signals off the walls. I have it sitting under my TV and it somehow controls all my devices without direct line of sight.
Doubt it though- Apple doesn't want you using a blu-ray, and this would replace your DVR. Stereo control is a huge deal for me though so I would be more than excited about some sort of device control, and wireless IR receivers sounds pretty nice- could be a third party add on if API allows it.
HDMI bandwidth is 10.2 Gbps. Thunderbolt is supposed to go far beyond 10 in the future. I can see a need for more bandwidth if the cable is supplying video, taking camera footage, passing motion sensor info, downloading apps, etc.
You think "it's" about the name still... Why is their "laptop" called a MacBook, their "MP3" player called an iPod, their "tablet" called an iPad, etc etc???
Let's leave the names to the side, and talk shop...
This thread is about an Apple Television Set that not one of us knows the name of, and you want me to answer you a question about Apple naming a product "Apple TV". Can you please help me help you - why isn't there an Apple iTV(or the appropriate term/name - 'Apple Television Set') at the moment?
Such TVs are available already. Look for any Samsung, LG or whatever with Smart functions. All you (eventually) need is a small 2,5" HDD attached via USB.
I understand that you personally wouldn't be interested in a 60" TV. I don't understand how it logically follows that a 60" TV is "stupid," or what difference it makes whether you call it a TV or a cinema. If you have the room, once you step up to a big TV, you won't want to go back to a smaller size. I was in Costco yesterday, and they had a 60" Vizio LED TV for $928, so the cost for a basic 60" model is no longer prohibitive. So why would Apple not make a 60" TV, if they think there's a market for it, and they can make the profit margin they want to make?
I hightly doubt TV's get replaced every 4 years. I would say 5-7 years would be more reasonable. Mine is 5 years and while the new LED models are much nicer, I'm still content with mine.
I highly doubt Apple will get into the TV market though. They might do another box like before with better integration with select partners, eg Sharp.
Similar to how Samsung devices all work together, (eg. TV, BluRay player, and their sound systems) can be controlled by a single remote.
Apple would have to sell their TV's at least 50-80% higher, and not a lot of people will pay that premium. And there's no one that would be willing to subsidize the costs.
I highly doubt Apple will get into the TV market though. They might do another box like before with better integration with select partners, eg Sharp.
Similar to how Samsung devices all work together, (eg. TV, BluRay player, and their sound systems) can be controlled by a single remote.
Apple would have to sell their TV's at least 50-80% higher, and not a lot of people will pay that premium. And there's no one that would be willing to subsidize the costs.
The coaxial cable to lightning connector is a pipe-dream. The cable companies will definitely make you have a CardCARD system. Anyways, it should be a coaxial to thunderbolt connection, IF it were even remotely feasible.
Finally, it should detect Samsung TVs and only run at 720p on those...
Finally, it should detect Samsung TVs and only run at 720p on those...
That price estimate is crazy low!
Really?! $149 for a device that is a Game Console and a DVR with 1 - 3 TB of storage? I bet the 3d graphics have to be better than XBox 360 to be a contender. This does not make much sense.
The Central Hub for content idea is sound but everything else is pie in the sky.
He should let his company produce that device and see how fast he goes out of business
He must be thinking that customers are signing a 3 year contract or something to subsidize that wonder device.
Really?! $149 for a device that is a Game Console and a DVR with 1 - 3 TB of storage? I bet the 3d graphics have to be better than XBox 360 to be a contender. This does not make much sense.
The Central Hub for content idea is sound but everything else is pie in the sky.
He should let his company produce that device and see how fast he goes out of business
He must be thinking that customers are signing a 3 year contract or something to subsidize that wonder device.
Honestly, I think the AppleTV is pretty great the way it is and most of the updates and feature enhancements can easily come via software updates.
My wishlist includes:
-Ability to subscribe to TV channels. Individual channels, not packages.
-Ability to connect an iSight or similar camera to enable FaceTime.
-and more functionality in the iOS Remote app that aids to the overall experience.
My wishlist includes:
-Ability to subscribe to TV channels. Individual channels, not packages.
-Ability to connect an iSight or similar camera to enable FaceTime.
-and more functionality in the iOS Remote app that aids to the overall experience.
Yep. Whenever mine breaks, I will get a new one, and I sure as hell won't be paying $1500.
I do wonder how many of those posting here have bought a smart TV in the last 12 months. Almost all of the nice to have features mentioned here are already available on many Smart TV's in the shop today.
I have a Sumsung that can record and pause tv run Plex to connect to my Media server, connect to any DNLA server, stream video from multiple sites like Love film, Netflix and others, has interfaces like iplayer and ITV player, runs a browser, connects to Utube plus lots of other features.
I no longer use my apple TV device because its redundant.
I use voice commands with my xbox all the time. I only wish I could use it for other commands like turn on Apple TV, turn off TV, turn on PS3, etc...
Forget about an integrated TV...Apple should just release a large-format Thunderbolt display (50", 55", 65") optimized for HDTV content, along with a improved set-top box.
The display, being optimized for HDTV, would be a simplified version of the Thunderbolt display that's currently made for Mac. So, this would mean a lower 1080P resolution and less i/o features, but still a FaceTime camera and microphone and one Thunderbolt input (forget HDMI input and other inputs since it is made for interfacing with the Apple set-top box). With the reduced feature-set - hopefully that would mean a similar price for a much larger display.
The set-top box would be the hub for connecting whatever you would like to connect to the Thunderbolt display. And, could be more reasonable to update on a 2-year product cycle. So, your Thunderbolt monitor stays with you for a good number of years (like a typical lifecycle of a TV), but the set-top box gets upgraded from time-to-time as technology advances and keeps revenue coming into Apple.
The display, being optimized for HDTV, would be a simplified version of the Thunderbolt display that's currently made for Mac. So, this would mean a lower 1080P resolution and less i/o features, but still a FaceTime camera and microphone and one Thunderbolt input (forget HDMI input and other inputs since it is made for interfacing with the Apple set-top box). With the reduced feature-set - hopefully that would mean a similar price for a much larger display.
The set-top box would be the hub for connecting whatever you would like to connect to the Thunderbolt display. And, could be more reasonable to update on a 2-year product cycle. So, your Thunderbolt monitor stays with you for a good number of years (like a typical lifecycle of a TV), but the set-top box gets upgraded from time-to-time as technology advances and keeps revenue coming into Apple.
Naming is very important to Apple. iTV is a trademark that Apple has no grounds to infringe on. They would lose swiftly in court and according to a quick google search:
I remember reading it then in 2010. I even recall an article saying Apple agreed not to use the term (under Steve).
It's not important in this thread, though. But there is a reason that the Apple TV is not already called the iTV.
Yet again, I don't understand this mentality: "I don't want a particular product/feature, therefore it's stupid, therefore Apple shouldn't make it." I have a 1080P 2D/3D projector and a 120" screen. Why on earth would I want to replace that with a 47" (or whatever) Apple flat screen TV? A set-top box, on the other hand, would interest me very much. And even if I did have a flat-screen TV in the size range Apple might make, I still wouldn't want to replace it, if it were of recent vintage and still worked fine.
As for "It's for people that want the Apple experience on a non-Apple brand TV. Just reaches more market." Oh my God! The horror of that! I have an old MacBook Pro that I use with an old Samsung external monitor. At the time, I wanted the Apple experience on a non-Apple (i.e., less expensive at the time) monitor.
So if Apple does make both a TV and a set-top box, you can buy the TV, and I'll buy the set-top box. Would that work for you?
You are correct about Apple's overarching strategy being to move away from internal storage. Unfortunately the world does not have the data transfer (read internet/cable) infrastructure in place to fully support this vision. One of the most anticipated functions of an Apple TV is gaming. Currently, gaming on a TV is facilitated using external hardware (Xbox, PlayStation, Wii). I anticipate that Apple will integrate gaming functionality in any TV they make. The app store would expand to include major TV gaming titles. Most popular games are too large to be streamed effectively. This means that the game has to be either stored locally on a hard drive, or on an external media (cd, dvd, etc.). I believe that the movement at Apple to remove needless media input devices like cd and dvd players takes precedence over removing hard drives. Thus, any Apple TV will require a hard drive up until the time that the internet/cable companies are able to provide 100% reliable and extremely fast signals.