Rogers and BCE Already Have the Apple iTV in Their Labs, Controlled with Voice and Hand Gestures

[monaarts]

What I do see is this:

AppleTV 3 that works almost as a hub so all other devices can plug into it (think current AppleTV with like 4 or 5 HDMI inputs and 1 output). The device will control these other devices with HDMI CEC and/or Wi-Fi connectivity. This will allow for the interface of your Cable box, dvd player, bluray player, cd player, xbox, ps3, etc to be the same as everything else because it will be the interface of the AppleTV 3.

Imagine inserting a bluray into the player and it starts on the AppleTV interface. You click pause and you see the AppleTV GUI. You click Play and it starts again, you click TV guide and the Bluray movie goes into the corner of your TV and you see the TV guide for your cable box (in the AppleTV GUI) on the rest of the screen... You highlight your favorite show, click record, and the AppleTV starts sending the signal to your iTunes and records it on your computer.

Later in the day you're watching the recorded TV show on your TV but decide to go cook dinner in the kitchen, which is nowhere near your TV, so you pick up the iPad and start watching it there - kind of like reverse AirPlay. The show you recorded finishes but you're still cooking so you load up the TV guide on the iPad and select to watch a different TV show or you can select to finish watching the Bluray movie you started earlier. You finish dinner with 30 minutes left on the movie so on the iPad you just select to watch it in the living room instead (with the Airplay icon) and Boom.. it starts playing there!

By using the AppleTV 3 as a media receiver and then a single output to your AV Receiver, your tv, etc you can have a more simple setup and the limitations are almost endless thanks to iTunes integration and AirPlay support to the iPad, iPhone, iPod, or other AppleTV's in the house.

This is honestly my thoughts on what happens. I think Apple has figured out that people don't like to use 5 different interfaces but they do like to use 5 different devices! ;-)

No one is going to want to "talk" to their TV all the time. I could see the new AppleTV coming with an iPod touch that has almost no memory, no App Store access, made of cheaper materials, etc so it can specifically be used as a remote so everyone has access to the touch screen for stuff (like typing).


- Joe

 

[Yvan256]

I think USA posters should be reminded that CableCard is a USA-only thing.

Whatever Apple does will need to work world-wide. The little AppleTV box works fine, I don't see the obsession with an Apple TV set.

Change the Apple TV box, make it so it can be installed on top of a TV, add a mic and camera and voilà, instant FaceTime device.

Some people still use CRT TVs, so if Apple thinks people will replace their brand-new LCD/plasma/whatever for a complete Apple TV set, they're out of their collective minds.

 

[ronjon10]

I will hold judgement. Apple has pulled things off that I never thought I'd go for in the past.

However, at this moment, I don't myself wanting to to talk to my TV or wave my hand around to make my tv function. I'm a fat lazy American, moving my thumb over the remote is hard enough

 

[Frosticus]

I think USA posters should be reminded that CableCard is a USA-only thing.

Whatever Apple does will need to work world-wide. The little AppleTV box works fine, I don't see the obsession with an Apple TV set.

Change the Apple TV box, make it so it can be installed on top of a TV, add a mic and camera and voilà, instant FaceTime device.

Some people still use CRT TVs, so if Apple thinks people will replace their brand-new LCD/plasma/whatever for a complete Apple TV set, they're out of their collective minds.

Depends how good it is... the same could be argued about people not replacing their perfectly good phone, yet many people obviously run out and buy an iPhone because it's (arguably) a great product. If Apple do the same with TV, what's to say a similar (but huge) shift in consumer spending won't happen?

I would agree though that the product needs to be universal, and not dependent on viewing technology like CableCard which only exists in U.S. - I'm sure the final product, whatever it is, will have this taken into consideration though.

 

[William Gates]

I call ******** on this.

 

[Clive At Five]

Rogers and BCE Already Have the Apple iTV in Their Labs, Controlled with Voice and Hand Gestures

No they don't.

 

[ChrisAbalos]

This might sound crazy and impossible and I'm not exactly sure where we stand with current technology but...

What if Apple has developed a 3d tracking system accurate enough to get about the same level of accuracy as a touch screen but via the air? What if the gestures were identical to that of the iPad and iPhone? This might sound nuts, but if the camera was able to track your finger movements in relation to your eyes, I think it might be possible to get the same accuracy as if you were actually touching the screen. If your eyes were a point in a triangle in relation to the tv, it could use that point to figure out at what angle and distance you are at. It could then figure out where your fingers are in relation and figure out what you are trying to touch. Basically like Kinect, but with a much higher resolution of accuracy.

With a system like this, it would be virtually the same as typing on an iPad. Not to mention all the gestures would be second nature to anyone with an iPad, iPhone or iTouch. Zero learning curve.

Apple is all about interfaces. If something like this was accurate enough, it would be a huge game changer for manipulating a screen at a distance. Imagine flick scrolling through a Netflix list on a tv.

Am I crazy?

 

[alent1234]

I think USA posters should be reminded that CableCard is a USA-only thing.

Whatever Apple does will need to work world-wide. The little AppleTV box works fine, I don't see the obsession with an Apple TV set.

Change the Apple TV box, make it so it can be installed on top of a TV, add a mic and camera and voilà, instant FaceTime device.

Some people still use CRT TVs, so if Apple thinks people will replace their brand-new LCD/plasma/whatever for a complete Apple TV set, they're out of their collective minds.

i don't know about the rest of the world but in the USA if you want to watch satellite or cable TV the provider gives you a box that costs them hundreds of $$$. and they have to have extra boxes for free replacements in case yours breaks and pay the overhead of the people to do the replacing.

as it is the boxes are fairly old and modern CPU's will easily do everything the box does and be cheaper on the electric bill. MS is doing something like this with x-box. expect direct tv and the cable companies to shift the box into the TV so they don't have to buy a new generation of boxes.

and this will enable the TV to do some cool things since it will directly communicate with the TV servers

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

So, let me get this straight...

We've gone from rumors of a cable TV killer, a-la-carte "let me pick just the channels I want" dream "so I can cut my huge cable bill down to very little" to a concept in which we just keep the cable TV subscription on top of buying a new HDTV of a type & screen size chosen for us by Apple? Is that right?

To deal with the Apple premium that is generally assumed, we lock in with our cable provider (the one that Apple partners with to make this work) who will somehow be motivated to give us a big discount in the cost we pay for the hardware (much like getting AT&T, Verizon or Sprint to pay for our iPhones in exchange for locking in with them for 2 years of service). Is that right?

And the added value we get for the above is an TV built in (no wires but probably no hardware upgradability either), some kind of camera to capture our physical motions (which might also give us "face time", maybe Skype, etc) and Siri as a remote-less way to control the TV. Is that right?

Since TVs have such a wide variety of desirable screen sizes, types (plasma vs. LCD vs LED vs OLED), etc, would it not make so much more sense to build the camera either into an TV3 (or as a(n existing) TV to TV optional accessory) in which all software benefits (like Siri) could be made to work just as well on ANY HDTV, including the ones we already own?

For all those so ready to buy now, do you really want Apple deciding the right screen size for you? Do you really want Apple deciding the screen type for you?

I decided the ideal screen size for me personally was 60"-65" (it fit my environment very well). There were many options in that size. But doing lots of research I focused in on a couple of models by Samsung. Within just Samsung, there were many options at those sizes. After careful consideration, I decided against my initial perception that LCD/LED was the way to go and chose plasma as the type. Yes, it uses a little more energy but yes, it also looks great from angles beyond straight on. Even with that further narrowing, there were still more variables. A key one for my own situation was a special adaptation to the screen that better managed reflections (lots of windows in my home).

The point being that Apple- being Apple- is just going to decide a bunch of stuff for us, then expect consumers to just accept Apple's choices and make them work. In my own case, this rumored 42" screen size is much too small (I wouldn't be interested in it to replace the 63" I have if it was priced at $200 (certainly not at $1000 or $1499).

Someone's obviously going to say "then don't buy it" but it's somewhat missing the broader point that when it comes to televisions, the whole marketplace is not 1-2 sizes fits all, 1 screen type fits all, etc. People may want a 46" screen bad enough to not settle for a 42". Other people may not have the space for a 42" but need a 38" or less. Not everyone is going to want Apple to decide the type of screen. And with each cut of variables important to individuals, the niche for an Apple Television gets smaller and smaller.

Sure, HERE, Apple could brand a new toilet bowl and there would be an abundance of "I'm buying it first day" posts. But beyond HERE is where this thing would need to sell very well. Can Apple make a bunch of typically buyer decisions for buyers and still get a big volume of buyers (beyond HERE) to buy?

Personally, I still think all this "smoke" is nonsense. Logically, I think we end up with an TV3 instead of an Apple Television. Every major benefit discussed about an Apple Television is software-oriented (capable of working just as well on ANY television with an Apple set-top box). In this thread, there's some discussion of a few hardware elements: a camera (to capture our motions) and a microphone (to hear Siri commands), but both of those are cheap & easy to build into an TV3 too. It seems there's people giving up on the idea of a dirt-cheap "just the content I want" offering via iTunes (but that too is just software that would work as well in an TV3).

I guess I just can't grasp the "why?" in this one. If the software is also available in a $100 set-top box, why do I need a whole new television with an Apple brand on it? Why do I need a 2-year commitment to a cable partner? Etc. Once you can separate the Apple software from the Apple hardware, the hardware must win its buyers on it's own merits (looks & guts), making this rumor unlike any of the other main-thrust product innovations Apple has rolled out in the last 10 years (where software was exclusively locked to the hardware, requiring buyers to buy the hardware Apple offered to enjoy the Apple software benefits). I can't imagine Ive's finest design work being enough to motivate someone to choose this TV over the multitude of others (does anyone really buy a TV based on how the case itself looks?). So that leaves hardware guts vs. the hardware guts in every other TV out there. Odds are high that Apple's Television guts will be made by Samsung, Sharp, LG or similar, and that partner will likely roll out the exact same hardware guts under their own brand too... probably at substantially less than Apple's price.

But wait, if Apple gets the cable partners to subsidize the set, they can win on price. Apple didn't innovate cell phone subsidies; they were there long before Apple built the iPhone. If those kind of partnerships can be struck to move Apple hardware, the same will be struck to move Samsung, LG, Sharp hardware too (just as they are with cell phones).

Every time I think through this rumor, I see complete mess. An Apple Television is nothing like reinventing the computer, portable music player, cell phone and tablet markets. The separation of software from the hardware leaves only the hardware to win on its own merits. Nothing else Apple sells has to compete solely on a hardware-only level.

 

[alent1234]

i don't know about a 2 year contract but current cable boxes are power hungry. especially DVR's. you will break even on the fact that one TV will use less power and cost you less money. and you will save on equipment rental fees. call it $20 or so a month or more depending if you also have TIVO

and no more 2-3 boxes to watch TV freeing up HDMI ports for something else

 

[monaarts]

My thoughts in an image: OMG!!!


- Joe

 

[newyorksole]

If only this logic prevailed on other threads about other manufacturers and their products. But it doesn't. So I think that ultimately - you take the good with the bad. People are always going to speculate and judge. Even after the product is released and they haven't even used it. Them's the internet.

Truuee.

Of course based off the info in the article it doesn't "sound" good, but we haven't seen or heard anything from Apple yet so we can't blow Apple's TV off.

 

[whooleytoo]

I think the poster meant that internet can go out. Which would render controlling the TV possibly difficult.

I think some cable providers might really like working with Apple - because if people are forced to bundle their cable AND internet together (if the signal isn't just via the cable signal to work everything) then that's added revenue.

Right now - people (although most do bundle) still might have different providers for phone, cable and internet.

Indeed. Plus - internet providers and content owners are at loggerheads at the moment over piracy. I'm sure any cable ISP would be delighted to work with a company like Apple which has a record of getting people to pay for easy to use, legal content solutions. It might help get the content owners of their backs!

 

[Blomkvist]

My thoughts in an image: OMG!!!


- Joe

I like the look of that interface...where is that image from?

 

[Navdakilla]

Lets see if they announce this this year or not.

 

[akira2501]

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/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Wow a tv with kinect on it.
FINALLY! but what happens if I need repairs. That's gonna be a lot of tv to carry even if it's thinner than an iPod touch.

 

[monaarts]

I like the look of that interface...where is that image from?

I made it. HAHA

 

[uk1simon]

I wonder if it will it be FULL HD (1080) or the not quite HD (720) apple format currently being used, if this is full HD then we might see widespread full HD availability in the iTunes store as well.

 

[iSee]

the rumor seems a little incoherent:

They’re looking for someone with wireless and broadband capabilities.

Wireless capabilities? The only wireless capabilties needed here is plain old wi-fi. I have a feeling people aren't going to need their TV to work on-the-go.

An on-screen keyboard, meanwhile, can also be activated in a similar manner, allowing viewers to surf the web, conduct video chats and use social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook

Yeah, because an on-screen keyboard is so critical to video chat and web surfing that those were the first two examples cited. (I realize a keyboard can be of occasional use for both, but is hardly critical.)

 

[KnightWRX]

Again, nothing with this rumor tells us why Apple feels the need to make the whole device, including the screen. What does the display add to this Kinect/Siri hybrid AppleTV box ? Why can't I use my Philipps TV or my Sony TV with a 99$ set top box like I can with an XBox360 or a Playstation 3 ?

 

[bushido]

call me old fashioned but i really dont understand whats so hard about using a remote ... ?


anyway, im always up for something new

 

[pondosinatra]

Ya! Suck it Shaw and Telus!

Oh no wait, that's bad for me. Rogers is only down East

 

[alent1234]

Again, nothing with this rumor tells us why Apple feels the need to make the whole device, including the screen. What does the display add to this Kinect/Siri hybrid AppleTV box ? Why can't I use my Philipps TV or my Sony TV with a 99$ set top box like I can with an XBox360 or a Playstation 3 ?

because others are doing it

in 5 years if apple doesn't make a full TV you will be able to buy a TV with an integrated cable box inside as well as pay for services to buy/rent content and music. that's a lot of potential lost itunes business.

add the fact that it's going to be samsung to do this and they will probably tie it back to their phones and thats a huge risk to the iphone business

 

[iEvolution]

A xbox 360 and kinnect is a much cheaper option and it has the extra benefit of video games. Not buying a new Tv with the apple premium for siri and ios support when i already have an ios device. I watch Tv mostly in bed I'm not interested in doing hand gestures or voice commands.

Funny enough the media is going to promote it as the next coming of Christ and it'll sell anyway.

I don't understand what the point is and if its integrated with the current itunes prices it is a big rip off in my opinion when you can get services like netflix for less than the price of one video on itunes.

Guess we will have to wait and see, further apple does have a tendency to have problems with displays.

I believe this will have a negative effect on the apple Tv box too since Apple tries to keep certain products outdated in order to try to get people to upgrade to the more expensive model.

 

[I WAS the one]

Woohooo!