Samsung Underestimating Apple's Potential Impact on Television Market?

[theshirko]

why would apple not fail ?

because it has managed to build and maintain a special bread of idiots, with lots of cash, and that is enough...they would buy iPoop , the smart toilet apple will release in 2018,
they just need the apple logo to get an erection..
not to mention apple is a ruthless mafia style enterprise, like any mafia, it has many people on the pay...politicians , entertainment people, and the best PR team , not to mention the enforcers ...

 

[25ghosts]

I'd like this project manager of Samsung come home in my living room and take a look at my samsung LCD TiVO. Then he can compare it to my 10 year old philips Plasma TV and weep.


Samsung builds among the worst quality TVs around. Same goes for their monitors.

Cheap yeah... And with Samsung you get what you pay for...


I will never ever again purchase a product carrying the name of Samsung. Unless of course they start making quality..


Really made ME laugh as the project manager states that they have 10,000 folks in research & Development.... 10,000 and all they came up with was POOR contrast and CHEAP looking images.....


HA !

 

[MonkeySee....]

I wouldn't go that far. I also have an Apple TV which is basically the same thing only not built in. I couldn't even see my PC until I got my MBP. I think I wasted $130. I was hoping I could buy good apps or JB it and do cool things with it.
I just don't want to spend $40 to use XBMC ATV2 when the ATV does the same thing. Am i missing something cool? If so then I would pay the $40.

I also have the ATV2. I went from having a WD media player with an attached drive to wireless syncing with my MAC. I know its not setting the world alight but its one of the better media devices out there

Now if they bought a TV with this built in it would be one less box sitting on the side.

----------

because it has managed to build and maintain a special bread of idiots, with lots of cash, and that is enough...they would buy iPoop , the smart toilet apple will release in 2018,
they just need the apple logo to get an erection..
not to mention apple is a ruthless mafia style enterprise, like any mafia, it has many people on the pay...politicians , entertainment people, and the best PR team , not to mention the enforcers ...

I'm sick of paying money for mediocre products just "because". When I SAVED UP for my iMac I was so proud to have such a beautiful and minimalist computer. Some people don't see past the ghz which is fine but the computer is part of my furniture and my life and its money well spent.

Don't go around calling people idiots because they appreciate design.

 

[pmau]

I'd like this project manager of Samsung come home in my living room and take a look at my samsung LCD TiVO. Then he can compare it to my 10 year old philips Plasma TV and weep.
Samsung builds among the worst quality TVs around. Same goes for their monitors.
Cheap yeah... And with Samsung you get what you pay for...
I will never ever again purchase a product carrying the name of Samsung. Unless of course they start making quality..
Really made ME laugh as the project manager states that they have 10,000 folks in research & Development.... 10,000 and all they came up with was POOR contrast and CHEAP looking images.....
HA !

You might tell us what Samsung TV's you have experience with.
Mine works beautifully (D8090, 46")

 

[JAT]

Exactly why her following sentence was inappropriate - it assumed that the "purported" statement was fact.

...and I've never heard anyone recommend projectors or plasmas for brightly sun-lit rooms.

So, you are assuming people are using words incorrectly? I...I have no way to reconcile that with most of your comments. Is it supposed to be an oxymoronic phrase? See, I would assume following words are opinion, but perhaps you take issue with people having those? Again, I find that contradictory coming from someone stating as fact that a plasma cannot be used near light. On that, do you even know why you've been told that? Other than FUD, of course.

 

[emulator]

And I will keep buying Vieras and keep using my own media players with my own content. I don't need some big brother telling me what should I watch in what quality.

 

[pondosinatra]

Wrong. If it was all about quality then I'd still be able to buy a Pioneer Kuro (which are now going for around $15,000 used).

 

[pondosinatra]

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)



You absolutely missed the point of his comparison. Pioneer Kuro Plasma displays were considered the top of the top in terms of pristine picture quality. For the keen eye, these sets blow away Samsung models. I know. I own one.

The point is, even with the best picture quality on the market, Pioneer continued to lose money and eventually had to shut down their plasma division. It has nothing to do with market share. Consumers kept buying LCDs over plasmas because of cheaper prices and "newer technology" lingo. (And anyone who believes LCDs are superior to Plasmas need to head over to AVSforum.com and get spanked by all the hard core enthusiasts over there and learn a thing or two about picture quality).

So this comparison slaps it in the face for Sammy and just proves the hypocracy in their statement. They never had the best picture quality in the market. That title belonged to Pioneer.

I'll also add that it's my understanding that some of the technology in the last Kuro gen (of which only a few were sold before being shut down) ended up being incorporated into Sharp plasmas.

 

[aerok]

Once again, failure of a post title... How do you underestimate something that is not out yet? The title is beyond biased and based on an baseless assumption.

 

[nylonsteel]

re original article

would love to see a presentation of great past under estimate comments from aapl competitors

i'm glad aapl has not brought to market an aapl tv yet - its too soon

aapl - you keep the steady course you're on

 

[krzyglue]

If you've been here long enough you'd know about the long queues outside Apple stores at every iphone/ipad launch. I'm not making it up, people, plenty of people do it. Get your head out of the sand.

How is my head in the sand? I bloody bought my iPhone 4 on launch day, I know precisely about this phenomenon you speak of.

My point is that a TV is markedly different than an iPhone for numerous reasons. And it annoys me to no end that you still dodge my third point.

 

[ILikeTurtles]

I've read the Sam guy statement, "it's all about picture quality", and i wonder how you can be so naive and yet have an important role.

People don't have a clue about picture quality, as much as they don't have a clue about audio fidelity. Thinking that people choose a Samsung TV because of its picture quality is stupid.
Maybe 10% of people can distinguish a good picture quality from an average picture quality.
The rest of he world sees the design of the TV, its price, the way you use it, the way it is marketed and displayed, the actual experience of having that big thing in the middle of the living room.

This Samsung guy is at the moment like someone stating in 2001 that the ipod can't have success because it's songs are played at 128kbps, which is low quality, and heck, they have a fantastic 100-button super hifi player that can work at XYZ bitrate.

This said: i think Samsung is designing great TVs both in design and in picture quality (at least for 99% of the world).
But if this is what they're thinking, that Apple can't match them because the black level on their TV would be 10% better, then i hope for them that Apple is not planning to enter in their market, because they're clearly not seeing it coming.

You, Sir, are spot-on with your comment!

 

[theshirko]

I also have the ATV2. I went from having a WD media player with an attached drive to wireless syncing with my MAC. I know its not setting the world alight but its one of the better media devices out there

Now if they bought a TV with this built in it would be one less box sitting on the side.

----------



I'm sick of paying money for mediocre products just "because". When I SAVED UP for my iMac I was so proud to have such a beautiful and minimalist computer. Some people don't see past the ghz which is fine but the computer is part of my furniture and my life and its money well spent.

Don't go around calling people idiots because they appreciate design.

no , don't misunderstand me,
Obviously you are Not one of them, because you did research and looked at the value vs return ..etc,so you appreciate design then i wonder , do you really need everything in your life to look the same ?

 

[richard.torble]

I've read the Sam guy statement, "it's all about picture quality", and i wonder how you can be so naive and yet have an important role.

People don't have a clue about picture quality, as much as they don't have a clue about audio fidelity. Thinking that people choose a Samsung TV because of its picture quality is stupid.
Maybe 10% of people can distinguish a good picture quality from an average picture quality.
The rest of he world sees the design of the TV, its price, the way you use it, the way it is marketed and displayed, the actual experience of having that big thing in the middle of the living room.

This Samsung guy is at the moment like someone stating in 2001 that the ipod can't have success because it's songs are played at 128kbps, which is low quality, and heck, they have a fantastic 100-button super hifi player that can work at XYZ bitrate.

This said: i think Samsung is designing great TVs both in design and in picture quality (at least for 99% of the world).
But if this is what they're thinking, that Apple can't match them because the black level on their TV would be 10% better, then i hope for them that Apple is not planning to enter in their market, because they're clearly not seeing it coming.

As has been said, you are exactly right.

I work in a store that sells Samsung LED sets (as well as others). People ask for a 'Smart TV', not a Samsung, but a 'Smart TV'. It's becoming the new 'Hoover'. They are drawn in by the design and the marketing. They are good TV's no doubt about that but they are not the best, not in the past (where Pioneer were better) and not now (where Panasonic are better). The Samsung chappy thinking they have it down is arrogant and misguided in my opinion.

 

[2IS]

I'd like this project manager of Samsung come home in my living room and take a look at my samsung LCD TiVO. Then he can compare it to my 10 year old philips Plasma TV and weep!

You mean laugh. I'm familiar with the 10 year old philips plasmas and they are complete **** compared to todays Samsung LCD's.

 

[mariusaz]

Smart TV, lol

I have one of these Samsung Smart TV's, the software IMO sucks and it's slow. The picture quality is great though, with my AppleTV.

 

[JAT]

I don't get the whole "Smart" TV deal. TV is dumb, you sit there, drool and watch it while you get fat. We've had Apps for ages here in Quebec at least. Our local cable co has been doing "smart" TVs with Apps for decades now. It was called Videoway early on as an analog service that provided games/weather info/lottery numbers and other oddities you might "want". Here's what it looked like near the end of its life (a screenshot of an old browser showing a screenshot of Videoway...) :

About 20% or so of subscribers actually paid for the thing, which also provided a short lived "Interactive TV" where you participated in the shows (it was actually 4 different angle shots you selected using the remote at given cues by the show), Videotron even required it for "pay channels" to try to force adoption.

Then we got Illico for the digital age. PVRs, Games, channel guide, a bit less stuff than Videoway, they mostly did away with the crap people didn't use. And ... people still don't use anything other than the PVR and channel guide.

If I want to run "apps", I have a computer, smartphone, whatever to do that. If I want to "game" I have a game console hooked up to the TV which doesn't require throwing out the TV when I change it. If I want movies, I have a blu-ray player or VOD from my cable co.

Also, a TV is a monitor. If I want "smart" out of it, I'll hook up a "smart" box to it via HDMI. That way, my 1080p monitor can last for years and I can upgrade the "smarts" every year or whenever there's a worthwhile update, independant of the monitor itself. In the end, I don't see how "smart" TV can work. All of 'em are overpriced, "been there, done that" and no amount of gimmicks (Siri, Kinect) will ever be as efficient as a good old remote.

That is why anyone with a modicum of knowledge about TV and its marketplace thinks SJ's "crack" was about content distribution. Control would be the next most likely, but if SJ thought control was a problem, he had his head up his ass.

 

[thekev]

This Samsung guy is at the moment like someone stating in 2001 that the ipod can't have success because it's songs are played at 128kbps, which is low quality, and heck, they have a fantastic 100-button super hifi player that can work at XYZ bitrate.

This said: i think Samsung is designing great TVs both in design and in picture quality (at least for 99% of the world).
But if this is what they're thinking, that Apple can't match them because the black level on their TV would be 10% better, then i hope for them that Apple is not planning to enter in their market, because they're clearly not seeing it coming.

It's nice to read a sane/educated post . The ipod comparison is really what we'd be looking at. People were already listening to 128k audio. Apple didn't really revolutionize the sound quality in any way, yet they made a killing on ipods. They've never offered the best cpus for the money. They've always offered a short selection on graphics cards in their machines, yet they still sell tons of macs. Trying to come at this from a hardware angle is unlikely to draw enough people beyond the dedicated Apple fan base. It needs something to draw younger people who have been increasingly viewing content on phones, tablets, and laptops as opposed to a traditional television..

If Apple makes a HDTV, it needs to do *everything*, including image quality, BETTER...

I hope they can do it. I sure wouldn't bet against them at this point..

I'm happy w/ my Sony XBR5 + Mac mini... I'm waiting for a 55"-65" 4K display... unless Apple really blows the competition out of the water .. And, even though it's not in my budget, I hope they do.

I'm not sure what you're missing here. Apple doesn't really cater to someone looking for the best possible sound in their music or the best possible display quality. They sell a smooth experience with simple choices that is palatable to a very wide market. This isn't anti Apple or Apple hatred. You hear them talk about designing the best possible products, but they are still the best possible mass market products. They're so big that even if the margins are there, niche or any slightly lower volume items really aren't their thing. They don't pioneer their own display technology and their integrated speakers have never been very good (although they offer some reasonably good third party options as well). The primary target market here wouldn't be someone who owns a full surround sound system and heavy curtains to enable the best possible viewing experience. That isn't their strength. Their strength lies in their ability to set mass market trends.

As for 4k, people have been saying that ever since drivers started to show up for it. That would involve a lot of R&D research from their manufacturing partners. It may not exactly be a decade from now, but implementing that on a large television is an unlikely step given the logistics involved in producing stable color over a very large display at higher pixel densities while meeting a particular price target.

You're completely forgetting about 4K...

You're forgetting that all of this is based on rumors.

You mean laugh. I'm familiar with the 10 year old philips plasmas and they are complete **** compared to todays Samsung LCD's.

This supports the theory that past a certain point, most people aren't likely to spot differences in quality.

 

[fertilized-egg]

because it has managed to build and maintain a special bread of idiots, with lots of cash, and that is enough...they would buy iPoop , the smart toilet apple will release in 2018,
they just need the apple logo to get an erection..

The fact that this post has +2 whilst a much milder pro Apple comment beneath this post has -2 says something about the Macrumors forum.

 

[2IS]

The fact that this post has +2 whilst a much milder pro Apple comment beneath this post has -2 says something about the Macrumors forum.

It could have something to do with the fact that everything the -2 (now -3) post said was simply... Wrong.

 

[Jb07]

If you think the average consumer really cares about having apps on their TV or iTunes integrated into it, you are wrong. My technologically-dumb Father, who has a Samsung dumbphone from 2009, a Windows Vista computer, and just gave up floppy disks 3 years ago, has no interest in Googling something on the TV. He wants to turn it on, put it on Discovery channel, and watch TV. My mother is the same way, although she does know somewhat about technology.

Also, so many people complain about having "5 remotes" to choose from when trying to change the channel. Really? I think we are over-exaggerating a little bit. Have you not heard of universal remotes?

 

[Black Belt]

While I think there is a market for an all-in-one Apple TV product, I don't think they are ready to compete at the component level. I definitely want an Apple TV box provided they make the specs resemble something other than mediocrity. But I have a glorious, big 3D Samsung 240hz LED screen. It is a thing of beauty and I see no reason to change that out. Sure the built in Apps and stuff are *****. I didn't buy it for that, I bought it for the smoking theater display that it is. People don't buy TVs regularly. So the actual TV idea may be hard pressed. Should they try? Why not! But considering all I've heard about is up to 50", I have to chuckle. I think their best bet for continued sales, something Apple LOVES, is a proper set-top box. And they should take a clue from the jail-breakers and incorporate some of those goodies. Then they would leave the Rokus and Google TVs as a blurry memory in the rear view mirror.

 

[KnightWRX]

That is why anyone with a modicum of knowledge about TV and its marketplace thinks SJ's "crack" was about content distribution. Control would be the next most likely, but if SJ thought control was a problem, he had his head up his ass.

And if iTunes is any indication of their idea of "content distribution", thanks but no thanks. My cable co's VOD service provides equivalent content to that and it doesn't eat into my allotted monthly bandwidth at least. Blu-rays are still cheaper for what you get than the itunes purchases also, and they don't require hard drive space to store, only cabinet space, which I have plenty of in the house.

Anyway, be it remote controls through voice/gestures or content distribution, I still don't get why it needs to be a whole friggin TV. A 99$ Apple TV 3 set top box could do Siri, it could do Kinect gestures, it can do content distribution, it's downright easy to upgrade every year without having to ditch the 1500$ 1080p screen that's still perfectly good.

TVs are friggin monitors. Apple would get more market penetration with a set top box than yet another brand of monitors on the market.

 

[Timzer]

Yeah, I don't think Samsung has anything to worry about. They have some of the industries nicest TVs. Picture quality and looks are top notch. This gorgeous display will be my next tv come spring. 60 inches of pure beauty. Super thin bezel, camera and mic are just gravy on top of that screen. And you can bet my Home Theater PC kills anything out there for content. I buy TVs for their beautiful screens. My HTPC takes care of the software. Nothing comes close to a HTPC. And as soon as Samsung release their OLED later this year, I'll be in line. If Apple decides to do TVs, and come in with an LCD, ummm...well how cute of them. Leave the real heavy stuff for the big boys.

 

[charlituna]

TVs are a commodity item - and current offerings already offer a good feature set.

It's not whether Apple can produce a good TV... it's whether the market will bear an Apple-style premium price. Personally I doubt it.

That's after of course the main question which is 'is Apple actually making or even thinking about maybe making a TV in the first place'