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)
Can't wait to get one!
Can't wait to get one!
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.
Rogers and BCE Already Have the Apple iTV in Their Labs, Controlled with Voice and Hand Gestures
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Cable companies are resellers. The content they broadcast is owned by other parties. They are the ones who control what goes where.
At most an Apple TV will just be another TV Everywhere device requiring you to have an existing cable sub and a limited choice of options. If you've seen a TV Everywhere app like the one Time Warner Cable deployed then that's what you will get. Other programming choices will be down to individual networks, like HBO having HBOGo.
CableCARD is a pain and it will probably not be a Tru2Way set because that road is a dead end now. The most you will get is whatever options will be streamed and licensed from participating cablecos.
In the end however you'll still be paying your cable company. It just means you can choose whether or not you think not having a STB (and it's associated content) is worth the tradeoff in simplification and the increase in bandwidth charges
The cablecos are the de facto owners because it's the deals with the cablecos that make up such a huge percentage of business. The content owners can choose other distribution partners, but they don't want to upset their cable partners because they need the cable company contract as their bread and butter.
The streaming service market doesn't reach a large enough portion of their audiences to allow them to thumb their nose at the cable and satellite industry.
Siri works nearly flawlessly for me and I use it everyday. It has truly become my assistant and my memory. A TV with Siri would be great for me. I would pay more per month for a subsidized Apple TV that replaces "the box." My only concern is that it must be at least 50 inches.
Voice and gesture control??
The only way this TV could be less appealing is if it smelt of garlic, or peed in the corner every time a scary movie came on.
As long as it includes a physical remote (included, not as an extra) or an iPad remote app, I don't mind too much. Otherwise.... yeeeesh!
The only way this TV could be less appealing is if it smelt of garlic, or peed in the corner every time a scary movie came on.
As long as it includes a physical remote (included, not as an extra) or an iPad remote app, I don't mind too much. Otherwise.... yeeeesh!
Agreed. If gestures are required to control the device I will have no need of it whatsoever.
If it's ANYTHING like Netflix's Kinect interface, brace yourself.
Yes. Exactly this, considering now with an Xbox 360 you can watch Live TV from FiOS and U-Verse (coming soon).
Slower response times, maybe? Seriously, it's not that hard to build in the service you need. Our old car had gracenote built in, and anytime it needed to update it could do it. Works better and more efficient.
You don't have to be like that. You can be as fluid as "Xbox, open Netflix for me" or "Xbox, bing Forza Motorsport for me".
You hit the nail on the head...I think this is where we're going. What if you agreed to a 2-year contract with your cable provider in exchange for a subsidized TV? A combination cable/Internet package with apps from the provider AND the entire App Store?
Cable isn't going anywhere...it's too ingrained in the industry, a part of the entertainment ecosystem. I think cable companies might jump at the chance to offer an Apple television, given their falling subscriber rates.
I think there are some truths and some falsehoods in this report.
1) Apple is entering the television market: true. Where there's smoke, there's fire; and just as rumours about an Apple Phone existed a few years before the iPhone's release and (arguably) revolutionizing the phone industry, we are now seeing the smoke surrounding an Apple television venture that is more than Apple's 'hobbyist' television product.
2) Apple will be making deals with providers in both wireless and broadband capabilities: who knows. Over the past year it was revealed that Apple had investigated the possibility of creating their infrastructural network, in lieu of partnering with carriers for the release of the iPhone. While this was infeasible at the time, Apple now has over $80 billion of cash reserves, extremely high customer satisfaction ratings, and large-volume sales. Personally, I suspect that they would still not attempt being their own carrier... Utilizing another carrier's infrastructure gives Apple a buffer for when bandwidth supply inevitably falls short of demand.
3) Apple will be making a television set: possibly, but I don't think so. Apple is known for their incredibly beautiful and fluid GUIs, and to a large degree, this is due to optimizing for one screen resolution. Even when the iPhone went Retina, they scaled their pixels by 2x (1 pixel became a 2x2 array of pixels). That said, however, they have been experimenting with resolution independence in their interfaces, and I suspect a television would be a great medium to finally reveal a true size/resolution independent interface. I also don't think people are willing to pay more than they already do for new television sets, and we know that Apple is absolutely uncompromising in where they want their profit margins to be.
4) Hand gestures and Siri as primary controls: seems unlikely. If by 'hand gestures and Siri control' reports are referring to iOS device control, then that seems more likely. As far as I'm concerned, when Apple made Remote, they made the ultimate music control device. I don't see why they couldn't extend this to make the ultimate television control device out of iOS devices.
5) Exclusives for content: likely. In conjunction with the more realistic premise of Apple making some sort of content access device (ie. DVR), a low entry cost and higher subscription-based costs to access a company like Roger's infrastructure and newly-licensed exclusive content makes a lot of sense.
I'd love to discuss others' opinions if anyone would like to rebut.
1) Apple is entering the television market: true. Where there's smoke, there's fire; and just as rumours about an Apple Phone existed a few years before the iPhone's release and (arguably) revolutionizing the phone industry, we are now seeing the smoke surrounding an Apple television venture that is more than Apple's 'hobbyist' television product.
2) Apple will be making deals with providers in both wireless and broadband capabilities: who knows. Over the past year it was revealed that Apple had investigated the possibility of creating their infrastructural network, in lieu of partnering with carriers for the release of the iPhone. While this was infeasible at the time, Apple now has over $80 billion of cash reserves, extremely high customer satisfaction ratings, and large-volume sales. Personally, I suspect that they would still not attempt being their own carrier... Utilizing another carrier's infrastructure gives Apple a buffer for when bandwidth supply inevitably falls short of demand.
3) Apple will be making a television set: possibly, but I don't think so. Apple is known for their incredibly beautiful and fluid GUIs, and to a large degree, this is due to optimizing for one screen resolution. Even when the iPhone went Retina, they scaled their pixels by 2x (1 pixel became a 2x2 array of pixels). That said, however, they have been experimenting with resolution independence in their interfaces, and I suspect a television would be a great medium to finally reveal a true size/resolution independent interface. I also don't think people are willing to pay more than they already do for new television sets, and we know that Apple is absolutely uncompromising in where they want their profit margins to be.
4) Hand gestures and Siri as primary controls: seems unlikely. If by 'hand gestures and Siri control' reports are referring to iOS device control, then that seems more likely. As far as I'm concerned, when Apple made Remote, they made the ultimate music control device. I don't see why they couldn't extend this to make the ultimate television control device out of iOS devices.
5) Exclusives for content: likely. In conjunction with the more realistic premise of Apple making some sort of content access device (ie. DVR), a low entry cost and higher subscription-based costs to access a company like Roger's infrastructure and newly-licensed exclusive content makes a lot of sense.
I'd love to discuss others' opinions if anyone would like to rebut.
Say all you want about Microsoft, but I think they are ahead regarding this particular kind of user interface with Kinect.
I would rather buy an XBox with Kinect (soon to be XBox720 and Kinect 2, maybe integrated into one device) and plug it into my TV of choice rather than an Apple TV.
Others made the same point about the current Apple TV device for $89-99 version 3.0 and any TV. (Obviously without the new user interface, but again you get freedom of choice and more value).
Most people already own a nice full HD TV set and keep it for a long time. It's not like a smartphone on contract you change every 12-24-36 months.
To sum up, I'm still puzzled how Apple will generate lots of sales with its own TV set.
Maybe it will just be a "Hobby 2.0" for Apple.
I would rather buy an XBox with Kinect (soon to be XBox720 and Kinect 2, maybe integrated into one device) and plug it into my TV of choice rather than an Apple TV.
Others made the same point about the current Apple TV device for $89-99 version 3.0 and any TV. (Obviously without the new user interface, but again you get freedom of choice and more value).
Most people already own a nice full HD TV set and keep it for a long time. It's not like a smartphone on contract you change every 12-24-36 months.
To sum up, I'm still puzzled how Apple will generate lots of sales with its own TV set.
Maybe it will just be a "Hobby 2.0" for Apple.
I really wish they make an accessory implant in my brain so we can just think of a video or a movie and see it immediately. I believe this is the only feasible way in which Steve could have cracked the TV problem....
Damn as I think of it now you could even visualize your imagination through the DreamPlay. We would never need to pay the big studios again for some ******** plots and effects again...
Damn as I think of it now you could even visualize your imagination through the DreamPlay. We would never need to pay the big studios again for some ******** plots and effects again...
Sure it does!
Steve Jobs:"People don't read books anymore"
**later**
Boom!
iBooks!
See how it works?
It makes sense. The easiest way to get any iTV ( it won't be called iTV, there's already a world wide brand called ITV who have refused Apple the name ) in to the home is with TV providers ( i.e., cable providers etc ).
Bandwidths are too limited, Apple have already found it tough going trying to go it alone due to restrictive business practices by TV studios / providers etc.
Apple need to cooperate.
disinformation?
I give this story zero credibility. If anything, Apple may be testing vendors to see how they perform on their non-disclosure agreements.
Apple's history is to introduce devices that devalue non-added resellers (record labels, cellular companies,etc.) I can't imagine they want to get involved with cable companies to sell product.
I give this story zero credibility. If anything, Apple may be testing vendors to see how they perform on their non-disclosure agreements.
Apple's history is to introduce devices that devalue non-added resellers (record labels, cellular companies,etc.) I can't imagine they want to get involved with cable companies to sell product.
I read the attached article. And it says nothing to make me believe this is a television set. it could very well be a new TV.
I know the MacRumors staff want this to be a television set. And they are so blinded by their want that any little rumour to them has to be a television set. They need to wake up and realise that no one knows if this is a television set or a new TV. And if you say you know you are either:
1. Breaking Apple NDA
2. Lying
This is why I take the rumours here with a grain of salt. Because the staff here for a while now can not write an unbiased article. Any word of a rumour that comes around to the staff here is a "sign of (X product) they really want".
You can still hope for a product but write unbiased articles. But I think I would be asking for too much if I expected that from the staff here.
Uh... siri?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3bdXctq7DM
Moreover, why not a higher resolution display? 32'' with res of 2560 by 1600 pixels?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3bdXctq7DM
Moreover, why not a higher resolution display? 32'' with res of 2560 by 1600 pixels?