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

Samsung Underestimating Apple's Potential Impact on Television Market?

when i have been wandering round an electrical store and people are choosing a tv, the first and foremost thing i hear people say is "I like the look of that one" not i like the picture quality. for the average non tech consumer a television is a piece of furniture that sits in a living room . personally I would rather have something that dont look like a tele until i wanted to watch it ,with no wires. most of these devices look ugly in a nice room . people do the same with cars and hifi and other appliances looks over performance e.g.:Bang & Olufsen,lamborgini smeg they are good, but there is better.

you could have the most tech advanced tv and if it doesn't fit in a woman's idea of what they want in the living room it won't go there

most of the friends that come round to visit me all want a iMac ,and not cos what it does they just like the look of it .

Apple has a good marketing team they make products look inviting with style packaging ,even their stores stand out ,make something look nice and it will outsell quality everytime
 
My Samsung TV is great.. won't be changing it for a long time yet!

Content is king ultimately, if your TV doesn't have the content its a lame duck.
 
What makes the author think that Samsung are underestimating Apple?

I don't think Samsung are underestimating them at all.

I think Samsung are very well prepared (as said in the article) for what Apple MIGHT come up with. In fact, Samsung would be more prepared than any other company.
 
Samsung is right that apple can't complete samsung by tech, alone. but samsung is wrong that apple will not just compete with tech alone but with content as a whole package (ecosystem).

look at music industry for example. remember the day if you want a good song, you have to pay for the entire 16-song CD for one good song? ipod alone would not make major music industry change but together with itune music distribution.

the same concept can be applied for TV. not like cable companies: 125 channel package with only a few watchable channels. even these few watchable channels have repeat shows and you have to deal with schedule or DVR, etc. on top of that, you have to wast your time watching loud Ad. don't even mention about picture quality.

if apple can provide TV content that consumers want and whenever they want it and cheaper. together with their idevice ecosystem, apple can bring a whole army (ecosystem) to compete with samsung, not just a gun which samsung thinks they have a better gun. Apple does not just compete with samsung but with cable tv as well. that is why Hollywood and content owners are very scared and gave apple a hard time.

Samsung again has to rely on google TV to compete. without google, samung will lose for sure.
 
Last edited:
*LTD* said:
I'm waiting for a reason to do that.

Oh wait, I'm not. I'm already a satisfied Apple user.

The consumer tech industry outside of Cupertino is ridiculously lame. They either run with the same ideas and structure that hasn't made them or anyone else any profit, or they copy Apple blatantly, or they do nothing for a few years (and *then* copy Apple blatantly.)

Consumers demand a little more these days. Hence, Apple's results.
Click to expand...

So the answer is you're not capable of doing so.
 
Last edited:
lilo777 said:
And I though that people knew how to use TVs since early last century. Why is it so difficult for you?
Click to expand...

Apple is going to do to TVs what they did to PCs. Remember all that crap you need to hook up to a PC, the screen, the speakers, the camera, and the mic? Then Apple came along and said "you're doing it all wrong, here's the iMac." Was it easy for you and I to hook up a PC? Sure. Could our parents or grandparents do it? Maybe, but maybe they couldn't. Can they hook up an iMac? Yes, they almost certainly can. Can we hook one up? Absolutely, and we can do it even faster than a PC.

Similarly, we know how to wire our TV screen to our receiver, our DVD player, our computer, our game systems, our speakers, and our everything else. Your grandparents don't. And sometimes, we'd rather (or at least I'd rather,) it didn't take an hour to hook up everything. Sometimes we'd rather it didn't take a few minutes to make sure everything has been switched from watching a DVD mode to recording to DVR mode.

Apple won't have specs for the TV that blow anyone away, what they'll have is a product that's so simple anyone can have it set up within seconds (well, maybe a few minutes... big screens are still a pain to move around and I haven't heard rumors about Apple researching ultralight 50" screens.) They'll have a system so friendly that you won't learn 100 buttons on your remote(s) for navigating dozens of menus for different devices, but instead you'll just ask the TV to do what you want, and it'll actually hear you and do what you want.
 
I like the look of the smart TV, but not the cross base they use. It doesn't really matter though, because most people wall mout it anyway.

I've been holding out because I am still stoked with my 47" LG TV from 2009. Let's see what 2012 has in store for the marktet!
 
I imagine it would be very well integrated with their other devices.

Today I bought my new iView, I was worried about the cost, but it's the best addition to my home in years. With a flick of my wrist my iPhone and iPad are shown on the full size of the TV making Angry Birds and Plants Vs Zombies more fun than ever.

One day the kids were fighting over who got to play their iPhone over the iView, the both flicked at the same time and came screaming "Dad! Dad!" to announce they just discovered if they flick at the same both will be shown on the iView at once. - We got a few friends arounds later and found it will support up to 16 phones, but the display gets a little small and it's best to mute the audio.

I love not having to use the crappy old TV cable, the quality was horrible, since our new Apple iView runs fully through our internet connection we've been able to do away with that annoying cable and the quality is crisp and better than ever, I don't know how I ever lived without it.

Although the iView was expensive, I'm amazed how much money I've saved on purchasing old style DVD's now that it's streamed straight from iFlicks and stored on our iView for a fraction of the price. I don't even need to go to the video store anymore, an extra savings on petrol too!

After realising how simple it was to flick our wrist and play games, view pictures and watch movies straight from our iPhones and iPads we bought one for the conference room and i-Flick - excuse the pun - all of our reports and other meeting contents straight up on the display - no more dragging around and wiring up those laptops! Our employees with iPhones love the ability to copy the reports to their phones just with a couple of swipes of their thumbs. Now most of our office are sporting iPhones, we've bought another iView and a few of our clients have bought some too after coming to some of our meetings.

I was amazed to find a very pricy hotel I stay in when in Hong Kong had an iView. First thing after my shower, I opened up iConference and called home the quality great, the sound was crisp and the video quality was amazing, I didn't know the built in camera was such high quality. It was almost like chatting through a window to one of the kids outside, better actually, I'm thinking of buy one for grandma now, she gets so lonely and it will keep the kids distracted when we visit.

I can't believe no one thought apple could make it in the TV industry. Even iPlay is starting to catch on now that some more famous gaming companies are starting to develop for it, now we might have to buy another one for the kids so we can still watch our movies.

Apple really has redefined the TV for both home and office!
 
After having read the thread I am worried that the discussion is about Apple (not) being a threat to Samsung and other TV makers.

But for me those quotes from Samsung representatives tell me one thing: they have no frigging idea what I want for in my TV (or from it).

Even if Apple might never go public with a TV I still would love to have a few things changed. And if you are into making TVs then here are my wishes:

- HELP me get rid of all these remotes (it is annoying: to have one for the TV - now used for volume up and down and power up and down as the big screen tube TV from year 2003 does not receive analogue signals anymore - but then I have another remote for the video recorder, which my wife refuses to retire, another one for a digital terrestrial receiver feeding the TV and one for a digital satellite receiver with built in HDD recorder also feeding the TV. I am thankful to the fact that we do not own a DVD or even also a BR player. However, I think you might get the point here: THIS CONVOLUTE OF REMOTES IS A PAIN!)

- HELP ME to NAVIGATE through channels (Buttons 0..9, UP, DOWN, Really? Why no alphabetical (and by myself handpicked and maybe even named favorite) list of channels to choose from? And WHY are there always more than 2 dozens of buttons on a remote? And why do I have to study even a manual to use it?)

- HELP ME to SEE (later and hence maybe even record) what I want to see (or me wife, who can record up to 600 hours of entertainment on her few VHS-cassettes, whereas our HDD recorder manages just around 40 hours and the latter can not even scale, whereas me wife goes out and buys another 5pack of VHS-cassettes. Hint: our satellite receiver's built in recorder allows to see one channel and record on another at the same time. I like that feature.)

- DON'T PROPOSE that i put an SD CARD or anything else into my TV to enjoy my photos and occasionally recorded holiday movie OR whatever - I hate owning these little cards and sticks and external drives and keep loosing those (sometimes just by breaking that stuff accidentally) - however you might manage to allow me to see these contents - any (external or to be swapped) physical storage medium needed means NO from me - and this is not negotiable (streaming from another device on the other hand, be it my laptop or tablet or phone is ok - and I would enjoy the huge display property for a few things)

- DON'T PROPOSE that I would want to SURF or use THE WEB from my couch on a screen about 14 feet away - brilliant picture or not: NOPE, NO WAY - forget about it - I don't need no Macrumors website and no Facebook website and no email on my TV (It is just an entertainment system) - well, maybe if it would be attractive if laid out and well readable like Flipboard or maybe it would come handy to see a small alert if a friend comes online and we could play a round or two of DOOM or even Quake III Arena on a big screen. (Hey, I did say WEB, I did however not say the entire INTERNET, of which some parts are just cool.) - READ: NO "CHROME", MAYBE some useful APPs (stock ticker even whilst not watching bloomberg or CNN, weather report and forecast whilst not watching weather channel, or send me a reminder (blinking icon) so I won't miss the kickoff of the game I wanted to watch, maybe offering a choice of watching or recording to avoid conflicts with my beloved ones preferences) (=

- DON'T PROPOSE I will (wear glasses to) WATCH FAKE SEMI 3D movies or shows - I endure this in Cinemas to get best possible but still bad experience - you might investigate real 3D projection and risk me getting a heart attack if under fire from a soldier in a movie - so please don't try to sell me a any fake 3D TV: it would be just a bad thing and I don't want to regret any purchase I made (which would fire back on you as I would probably associate "bad" with "you")

- DON'T ASSUME I am gonna fire up my TV to listen to music - I've got a HiFi Stereo for that - but that's another device then - but instead HELP ME to blast that sound from the movie to my HiFi without any hassles (and tons of wires and cables)

- JUST HELP ME to get entertained the way I like it. (Well, and you might want to watch you workers labour rights whilst doing so, because that helps us, me wife and me, to live more relaxed, you know?)

- IT WOULD BE A NICE TOPPING IF THAT "BOX" IS NICE AS A JEWEL to sparkle brightly in my home. =)

OK, here's the things I did not mention:
- picture quality
- display resolution
- color saturation
- contrast
- yada
- yada
- yada

Get it?

Why do people buy S class mercedes benz cars?
Because even if 10 or even 15 years old these cars provide their user with luxury and the joy of seeing forward to using them.
 
Last time I checked monitors typically had better picture quality than TV's. Just saying. I think it's a little presumptuous to say that consumers care only about the picture quality-- that's like saying all consumers only care about ghz (perceived speed).

If sammy keeps this mindset (unlikely) they're bound to get screwed at the next turning point, whether that be Apple, Google, or others.
 
darkplanets said:
Last time I checked monitors typically had better picture quality than TV's. Just saying. I think it's a little presumptuous to say that consumers care only about the picture quality-- that's like saying all consumers only care about ghz (perceived speed).

If sammy keeps this mindset (unlikely) they're bound to get screwed at the next turning point, whether that be Apple, Google, or others.
Click to expand...

The reason monitors have better picture quality then TV's is because monitors are usually smaller then TV's.
 
you guys keep talking about picture quality... HELLLO!!

user interface, responsiveness, remote control and content are what Apple is going to revolutionize. how good is the interface on your TV? probably not so good. it's probably choppy, laggy and not fluid.

Apple will excel with picture quality, content, user interface, speed etc.

thought it was obvious...
 
Capt Underpants said:
TV's aren't all about picture quality anymore, Samsung.

We're moving forward.
Click to expand...

Really? In my book it is. You can add anything to a TV, Apple TV, Ruko, Apps or whatever. I have a Samsung 63" plasma that is the best picture I have seen. If they can't top it I won't buy it. I'm looking for the best PQ I can find, and I own everything Apple.
 
krzyglue said:
There is just so much that is wrong with this statement.

1) Most people buy phones with subsidized contracts (oh let's say $200-ish). These contracts expire in around two years. That's not very much money.

2) Even if I had the damn money to buy a new TV year, and considering that I think myself as being quite enthusiastic about new technologies, I still would not do so. Just the inconvenience of replacing a television, all for marginal improvements that should never have been integrated with the TV in the first place, is enough to turn me off.

3) This type of throw-away thinking is precisely why there are so many things horrendously wrong with the environment today.
Click to expand...



People do, even if you dont agree with it.

Theres nothign wrong with what I said. Quite a lot of people buy phones outright, every year. And as I said before, Apple may offer a similar subscription plan as you get with iphones. Not impossible.
 
"TVs are ultimately about picture quality. Ultimately. How smart they are...great, but let's face it that's a secondary consideration. The ultimate is about picture quality and there is no way that anyone, new or old, can come along this year or next year and beat us on picture quality. "

Oh really? What about Apple's Retina display Samsung?

Samsung, make a better display for you Galaxies and I will believe in you.
 
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)

I too think picture quality is important. However, almost just as important is the size of the tv. I don't own a 63 inch plasma but I can say that after having a 50+ inch LCD I don't see myself being able to go to a smaller size. And while I don't own everything apple yet, I do use a MBP, iPhone 4s, iPad, ATV, and some of their networking accessories. Either way, a tv with a screen smaller than 50in just would not be worth it for me. Even though I'm sure that they will create an amazing product just based on their other products.
 
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)

Good point, I don't see why apple couldn't have an equally good picture quality screen. Or at least one that can compete with them.
 
This is a great thread. I respect Samsung and their ability to make a television. I think the grossly underestimate Apple's ability to compete on the picture quality front. Picture quality has been in Apple's DNA from almost the beginning. Here's the historical rundown:

1. 1978: The Apple ][. From the ][+ model forward, Apple had a hi-rez graphics mode that was ahead of anything else. When the IBM PC appeared in 1981, it's CGA graphics mode was the first real competition.

2. 1983/1984: The Lisa and the Macintosh 128. Bitmapped graphics from these computers were years ahead of anything else in the consumer space. Only the hyperexpensive Apollo workstations I remember from college were better.

3. 1987: The Mac II w/Color Trinitron screen. Sony was the OEM for the monitor and Apple reportedly rejected a bunch of these designs before accepting the one that went into production. It was expensive but it set the standard for computer color graphics for years (Windows was still in the EGA phase and would be for some time)

4. 1998: The iMac. The iMac showed the world that you could have a quality display in an approachable design with a reasonable price point.

And then there's pretty much every iMac that came after. The gooseneck version began the banishment of CRT screens from all computers with great quality. And every all in one Mac raised the level higher, with the current 27" IPS LED LCD screen Macs the standard bearer for any PC.

What I'm saying is that Apple has always cared about picture quality and has since the early days. That is a given with any new Apple television. What Samsung should be scared about are the things it can't duplicate. And Google TV is unlikely to save them.
 
newyorksole said:
you guys keep talking about picture quality... HELLLO!!

user interface, responsiveness, remote control and content are what Apple is going to revolutionize. how good is the interface on your TV? probably not so good. it's probably choppy, laggy and not fluid.

Apple will excel with picture quality, content, user interface, speed etc.

thought it was obvious...
Click to expand...

At what price? how much will you have to pay for that? this is my only issue with it, and if it the price is difference is small then samsung will be worried.
 
PadreQuevedo said:
"TVs are ultimately about picture quality. Ultimately. How smart they are...great, but let's face it that's a secondary consideration. The ultimate is about picture quality and there is no way that anyone, new or old, can come along this year or next year and beat us on picture quality. "

Oh really? What about Apple's Retina display Samsung?

Samsung, make a better display for you Galaxies and I will believe in you.
Click to expand...

Galaxy Nexus? 1280x720
 
Sevenfeet said:
This is a great thread. I respect Samsung and their ability to make a television. I think the grossly underestimate Apple's ability to compete on the picture quality front. Picture quality has been in Apple's DNA from almost the beginning. Here's the historical rundown:

1. 1978: The Apple ][. From the ][+ model forward, Apple had a hi-rez graphics mode that was ahead of anything else. When the IBM PC appeared in 1981, it's CGA graphics mode was the first real competition.

2. 1983/1984: The Lisa and the Macintosh 128. Bitmapped graphics from these computers were years ahead of anything else in the consumer space. Only the hyperexpensive Apollo workstations I remember from college were better.

3. 1987: The Mac II w/Color Trinitron screen. Sony was the OEM for the monitor and Apple reportedly rejected a bunch of these designs before accepting the one that went into production. It was expensive but it set the standard for computer color graphics for years (Windows was still in the EGA phase and would be for some time)

4. 1998: The iMac. The iMac showed the world that you could have a quality display in an approachable design with a reasonable price point.

And then there's pretty much every iMac that came after. The gooseneck version began the banishment of CRT screens from all computers with great quality. And every all in one Mac raised the level higher, with the current 27" IPS LED LCD screen Macs the standard bearer for any PC.

What I'm saying is that Apple has always cared about picture quality and has since the early days. That is a given with any new Apple television. What Samsung should be scared about are the things it can't duplicate. And Google TV is unlikely to save them.
Click to expand...

And who MAKES the IPS LCD screen? Not Apple.
 
I really don't see a Apple TV in my future. I have one 42 inch, one 50 inch plasma and one 720p 3D projector projecting on a 100 inch screen hooked up to a intel i5 windows machine that can play any media format and has built in HD tuner. I care too much about value to spend more than necessary on another flat screen TV with some Siri like smart features that will eventually go end of life. Will Apple guarantee updates 5 or 10 years after purchase or do they expect you to buy another TV? And lets not forget about the premium cost Apple would charge for a integrated TV. Just not worth it when other boxes can do everything a Apple TV would do.
Just beef up the Apple TV and add a universal bluetooth remote with microphone for Siri like integration. You can talk into the remote to control every AV function without pushing a bunch of buttons.
 
I agree with one thing.

I will agree that at least for me picture quality is my largest concern. Now as for the best this and that, my parents just purchased a 55" Samsung SmartTV and guess what, all those fancy scaling engines and picture improvement blah blah blah are useless. They actually make the picture quality look worse with Blu-rays and an Xbox 360 so once I turned them off, everything looked fantastic. So, just because you have all of these fancy so called "picture enhancing" features that to the average consumer make the picture look great, it actually makes it look worse if you pay close attention. Just give me oled for a good price and I could care less about how "smart" it is. Can't wait to see how Apple can change the tv market!
 
cdmoore74 said:
I really don't see a Apple TV in my future. I have one 42 inch, one 50 inch plasma and one 720p 3D projector projecting on a 100 inch screen hooked up to a intel i5 windows machine that can play any media format and has built in HD tuner. I care too much about value to spend more than necessary on another flat screen TV with some Siri like smart features that will eventually go end of life. Will Apple guarantee updates 5 or 10 years after purchase or do they expect you to buy another TV? And lets not forget about the premium cost Apple would charge for a integrated TV. Just not worth it when other boxes can do everything a Apple TV would do.
Just beef up the Apple TV and add a universal bluetooth remote with microphone for Siri like integration. You can talk into the remote to control every AV function without pushing a bunch of buttons.
Click to expand...

Apple will most definitely expect consumers to buy new iTV every 3 - 4 years, like imac imo.

----------
Rumple said:
You kind of lost me Samsung I like Sony better for picture quality.
Click to expand...

i believe more people bought samsung tv over sony... check it out.
 
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