Samsung Underestimating Apple's Potential Impact on Television Market?

[LFMNX]

Applesung

If Samsung makes the panel but Apple makes the WiFi, OS and Software it would be good integration. I don't think Apple is interested in becoming the technology experts for the panels themselves but rather providing integration and solidifying content relationships.

 

[Cordless_Drill]

I own a Samsung TV. I'm also an Apple owner. I like both companies.

I disagree with the concept that picture quality is everything. If Apple is able to make a TV that has good picture quality (let's call it 8/10) and some kind of innovative, intuitive method of controlling the TV, Apple will have a chance to dominate that industry.

Samsung better get cracking.

As it stands, would I buy an Apple branded television? No. Why? Simply because Apple being Apple will put a premium price on it.

I agree.

 

[JHankwitz]

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.

Like, who would ever even think of paying $700 for a 9.7" 0.75 mega-pixel iPad? Not a chance!

 

[haplain]

Retina display

Oh my! I love it when people make assumptions. See the funny thing is that if you compare displays on Apple's iPad versus Samsung's Galaxy Tablet I don't think that Mr. Moseley fully understands who he is dealing with. Apple has showed, time and time again, they don't release a product unless it is perfect. Even when the critics berated the iPhond 4S for a lack of innovation Apple went ahead and sold more iPhone's then ever. All of Apple's new products feature retina displays, such as the iPad, and iPhone I think Samsung should be shaking in their boots. What if Apple has acquired a retina display for its Tv's... making any Samsung 1080P Tv look silly... who will be laughing then.

 

[Supernicklas]

"We've not seen what they've done but what we can say is that they don't have 10,000 people in R&D in the vision category," [Samsung product manager Chris Moseley] said.

"They don't have the best scaling engine in the world and they don't have world renowned picture quality that has been awarded more than anyone else.

"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.

"So, from that perspective, it's not a great concern but it remains to be seen what they're going to come out with, if anything."

Apple could just buy an excising television maker and modify the technology to their needs and apply their own. Maybe Bang & Olufsen for example (not the greatest example, but you get the idea).

 

[Trik]

He is overestimating the average user...

My girlfriend consistently watches TV shows in SD because she doesn't notice that it's not in HD, which drives me nuts but I won't get into that. But the fact is, many people can't tell the difference from a Samsung 4000 series and their 8000 series "quality".

So it really all comes down to what Apple brings to the table with regards to features that aren't included elsewhere. If the average user can talk to the TV and it understands them intuitively and with context, they aren't going to give a rats ass if it technically has inferior "quality". It's not like Apple is going to take a Dynex TV and put an Apple TV in it. They are prob going to make a unibody TV enclosure out of Aluminum or Liquid Metal and then stick Siri in it then have Samsung build them the damn display anyway. Samsung isn't going to turn down that business, especially if they realize that is the only way they can survive in the long run because they haven't innovated beyond "picture quality" in years.

 

[techsmith]

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]
massive investment in picture quality improvements will trump anything Apple might be able to put together in other areas.

Wow, clueless. He should look at the current generation of gaming consoles where Nintendo cleaned the floor with PS3 and XBox 360 the first couple of years even with shamefully inferior graphics capability.

 

[firestarter]

Like, who would ever even think of paying $700 for a 9.7" 0.75 mega-pixel iPad? Not a chance!

What sort of reply is that?

There was only a very tiny tablet market before Apple came along.

Everyone has multiple TVs... the market is saturated. Are you going to pay double for a replacement TV just so that you can wave at it to change channel?

 

[Ryth]

Apple could just buy an excising television maker and modify the technology to their needs and apply their own. Maybe Bang & Olufsen for example (not the greatest example, but you get the idea).

Exactly. They don't need to come along and reinvent the wheel. They could just be teamed up with Sharp or someone.

Remember Palms CEO back in 2007

We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”​

We saw how that worked out...

 

[swarmster]

So he is doing what far to many in the tech industry do, looking at it from the engineer's perspective. Picture quality is important and a company can't put out crap but average consumers don't know squat about the technical specs. They see something in the store and can rarely perceive the difference in pixels with the way everything is setup.

Consumers aren't as savvy as so many of these product specific marketers and engineers expect them to be. People want ease of use and simple integration into their lives.

You know, your comment made me think of something. Even ignoring everything else, an Apple entry into the TV market should be at least a little threatening for one reason:

How does your average person buy a TV? They walk into a Best Buy or Wal-mart and talk to a not-especially-knowledgeable sales guy in front of 50 identical-looking sets? Now consider Apple selling a (singular! no alphanumeric model numbers in sight!) TV in their own stores.

Apple would have an impact based on retail experience alone. And there isn't a lot Samsung can do about that.

 

[Westyfield2]

To be fair to Samsung, the bloke has a point. In my TV picture quality is my number 1 concern. 'Smartness' can be achieved by plugging something in to the HDMI port. Audio quality can be achieved with an Amp & Speakers. But picture quality, only the TV can do that.


IMHO Pioneer > Panasonic > Samsung > Rest

 

[IXDoubleDXI]

Yeah, Sammie's pictures might be clear, but the quality of their sets, at least the ones i've dealt with hands on, is lacking, big time. I won't ever be picking up one of their units. I'm all for an affordable Apple TV, but if it does come to light, it'll be pretty expensive to other comparable units.

 

[erthquake]

"The ultimate is about picture quality...."

That's right. Quality is paramount, it means more than anything.

/s Everybody who listens to 128kbps mp3 files

 

[BrooklynTech]

Hah!

Typical of Samsung... They'll just wait until Apple comes out with something then mass produce it with a few tweaks. Why waste money on R&D when you can just tweak whatever Apple comes out with!

 

[Ryth]

You know, your comment made me think of something. Even ignoring everything else, an Apple entry into the TV market should be at least a little threatening for one reason:

How does your average person buy a TV? They walk into a Best Buy or Wal-mart and talk to a not-especially-knowledgeable sales guy in front of 50 identical-looking sets? Now consider Apple selling a (singular! no alphanumeric model numbers in sight!) TV in their own stores.

Apple would have an impact based on retail experience alone. And there isn't a lot Samsung can do about that.

This is why Apple succeeds. They build the user experience. Technology is only part of it.

That is why so many 'tech' type of companies with 'Engineering' types at the helm and who make key decisions are failing or struggling. They think things like reeling off specs and tech is what people want.

Specs don't matter..Apple has shown that with doing more with less with an optimized chipset and software made for that.

Even Sony admitted as much a year or so back...saying they had to stop listening to their engineers and what they considered 'cool' because an everyday person doesn't think like them.

 

[MisterK]

Someone's gonna change it

TV is Samsung's bread and butter and they're FANTASTIC at picture quality. I own two. I think they're half right... that for many many people, the picture quality is the ultimate factor in what makes a television. I just don't agree that it's most people. Moving from CRT TVs to Plasma and LCD/LED was huge. It was shocking... we changed aspect ratios and made a huge leap in picture quality and it was an enormous boon to the television makers... but now they're stuck. They can make better displays (and I'l be among the first in line for a 4k tv), but regular consumers still aren't getting every drop of HD out of their current televisions... the screen quality is not the laggard in the TV tech – every other aspect of your television is.

Television is not just the display. Television is also content that you want to watch. It's how you find and get that content. It's how you control your content. It COULD be about interacting with that content in new and novel ways (group Jeopardy with friends via webcam? Voting on American Idol? Buying what someone is wearing in Gossip Girl or in an ad? Imagine a car commercial that lets you do a Kinect style tour of the vehicle. Imagine interacting with Sesame Street and counting along – Microsoft already demoed this –.. but Cookie Monster could give your child a hint if they get stuck. How cool would a clothes commercial be if you could "try the clothes on" via front facing camera and buy right from there. Maybe there's a show where a viewer gets to opt in and possibly win a guest appearance right from their living room (moderated, of course).

Television could be games console, audio receiver, webcam, internet connected box, cable box, movie rental device all in one.... Apple only has a "hobby" that they wouldn't think twice about sacrificing to take a bigger piece from Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft... and yes... Samsung.

 

[Can't Stop]

And this is where Apple's unique perspective on what individuals value differs from Samsung's - and has led to their vast success.

See, what Samsung doesn't realize is that Picture Quality on a television, while important, is not the only thing that consumers look for. Well, perhaps right now, but what is so unique about apple, is to look at a traditional or common item - such as a phone, and show people that it can be SO much more, and that "call quality" is not the most important item. In fact, call quality seemed to have suffer on smartphones, with more dropped calls, etc.

With tv's, I suspect that Apple is predicting that while picture quality is important. Consumers are willing to sacrifice picture quality for a tv that shakes things up, and offers many more features. These include things like integration with iTunes, internet, movie streaming, etc. Some of these features exist on tv's (even samsungs). And while they tend to be pricey (where I would consider Apple's TV to fall) - none of the current offerings do this "well".

And this is where Apple really shines. They have a way of controlling the whole experience, making it extremely refined and just "work". Movie streaming is seamless, intuitive and easy to operate and understand on an Apple TV, same thing with iTunes sharing. These are just the things that I can imagine being on an Apple TV. But I do not work at apple, and they have people imagining things that a TV can do for years exclusively. I predict that Apple will have much more features that completely redefine the way we watch, use and interact with tv.

And of course, the thing Samsung fails to mention. Is the fact that in all likely hood, Apple might just buy or use a Samsung television's hardware as their basis or starting point for their Apple TV. Giving them the best picture quality, and the best features and overall experience on ANY television offering from any brand. Leave it to Samsung to think small - just like they think that a stylus is a new feature of smartphones that should be highlighted in a super bowl ad, when they died years ago with the palm pilots - the "dinosaurs" of smartphones.

We don't know if Apple is making a TV or a box like Apple TV 1 and 2 and if Apple is making a TV who knows that it's picture qualite is worse than that of Samsung TV sets.

 

[Torrijos]

I personally have gotten rid of all my Samsung equipment in the last few month...
My Samsung TV died because of a 5$ capacitor, a problem known all over the world for that model but Samsung wouldn't still handle the repairs without for a fair price.
If only that was it's only fault... Menus and configuration were terrible Divx player completely buggy, like the BR player (a Samsung too) so I switch both to Sony and while only time will tell if the reliability is good, already the interface has made a lot of difference.
With the Sonys I can finally manage both devices with the same standard (needn't buy another one) remote, and the BR player reads everything I throw it without issues.

Honestly if Apple bring forth an even better interface, but more importantly a real downloadable alternative to BR, with captioning and multiple languages, I'll be more than happy (having a 5MB/s internet connection) to switch one LAST time.

 

[felixfatfunk]

The computer says.....

Wrongggggg

I guarantee its not about picture quality, its about being able to turn it on with out five remotes kicking around the living room.

'It should just work'.....(sound familiar)?

And in this day and age that is what 'most' non techno people want, then the picture etc....

Apples strength? Intuitive simple tools that make stuff easy and fun to use, not clunky and frustrating.

Samsung, be afraid, be very afraid.

'They just don't get it' Quote Steve Jobs on Microsoft and Googles attempts at 'stuff'

 

[alexhooren]

Gotta say, this is the first time I think Apple might not succeed. I always believed in the iPhone, iPad, etc and thought people were underestimating them. But with TV, I think even Apple will struggle...

The reason being, they are entering a market with many more types of competitor. As everyone knows, content is king! Here in the UK, if you want to watch live sports, you have to have Sky Sports - that's non negotiable. Now if I subscribe to Sky, I get their box that does all content, PVR stuff, catch up, on demand. Then what about games? If you want to play "proper" games on your TV, you need a console, like a PS3. That console too can do nearly all the things you'd want it to re content.

I believe that TVs should be dumb screens, and whatever you choose to plug into them, grants you access to the ecosystem of your choice. Apple should let others race to the bottom on making good screens for peanuts, and focus on the Apple TV. Make it cheaper, add features, etc.

Imagine this for an idea... Apple gives you a FREE Apple TV whenever you subscribe to a full TV show series pass or subscribe to a years worth of iTunes Match. Of course only 1 per iTunes account though. That encourages people to purchase content through Apple and offers more points of entry to their ecosystem! Thus reinforcing the lock in to Apple content distribution. Games console manufactures have long figured that you can sell a console at a loss, then make a return thanks to game sales.

 

[Keebler]

the first few lines make me think other vendors probably said the same thing back around 2000 or so:

"What?! I heard they're making a portable music player? They don't have 10,000 R&D people. Meh! They're a computer company! Meh! So what do they know about music."

My point is this: I wouldn't count Apple out. The guy may have a point..time will tell, but to slough them off so easily is completely ignorant imho.

Cheers,
Keebler

 

[Kabeyun]

“Given Apple’s positioning of the product, it is likely to capture only a small share of the MP3 player market despite its breakthrough features."
- Charles Wolf, Needham analyst, 2001, re: iPod

"They’re just jumping into the party where everyone else is."
- Peter Skarzynski, Samsung VP, 2007, re: iPhone

"Apple's new iPad device is destined to disappoint."
- Adam Sharp, Twitter, 2010

 

[cube]

Remember iPod Hi-Fi.

 

[Scott6666]

Just this Christmas we bought an Samsung 55" TV and the picture was horrible.

Massively overprocessed so people looked like plastic. Blur reduction made movement twitchy. Returned for an LG.

Maybe those 10,000 people are trying to hard to justify their existence.

 

[GenesisST]

As long as they offer good interim solution, I'll consider it for the future. I currently have a high-end plasma TV, which I love and won't be replacing anytime soon.

So if they still offer an Apple TV box with the same feature set, or even a GOOD subset of the features, I'll consider when the time comes.

Even, I wouldn't mind replacing my current AppleTV 2 for an hypothetical Apple TV 3 (even if twice the price) for the interim. The older/current AppleTV would be awesome for the kids play room.

When I change my TV, then we'll see, but hopefully that will be in a few years.