Samsung Underestimating Apple's Potential Impact on Television Market?

[AidenShaw]

Then I saw their TV sets for cheap at a local store. No where in the store was there a resolution noted... I looked over the Samsung boxes ... no resolution noted.

It didn't have "1080p" or "720p" anywhere on the box? That's a surprising omission if they were retail boxes rather than shipping cartons.

 

[lilo777]

I'd like to add to this that for high quality gear today TV smartness is absolutely irrelevant. TV sets simply serve as monitors connected to A/V receiver via HDMI. All smartness should be connected to A/V receiver and not the TV. I do not want to listen to crappy 1.5W speakers on Apple TV.

On the other hand, maybe Apple wants to compete with Vizio for low end part of TV market?

 

[cube]

On the other hand, maybe Apple wants to compete with Vizio for low end part of TV market?

Given that I doubt they will get access to plasma or OLED panels, they WILL be low end.

 

[Dbrown]

Many of Panasonic plasmas were cheaper and had arguably had better image qualities than similarly priced LCDs. Yet they still struggled in sales because of various other factors.

Except they had burn in and image retention problems which makes the image look like crap and gave plasma a bad reputation to this day.

 

[chimes]

Missing the point

Steve Jobs said: "One of the things I've always found is you've got to start with the customer experience and work backwards to the technology. You can't start with the technology and try to figure out where you're going to try to sell it."

Picture quality is great. All the technology your 10,000 R&D engineers are coming with is great, no doubt. But Apple excels at the customer experience. And if your customer experience sucks, Apple will probably beat you.

 

[Bengt77]

I don't care so much for an Apple TV, as in, a television set made by Apple. But I do care for the Apple TV as a set-top box, the one they sell now. Let's say that Apple does indeed, as is widely predicted and even expected by now, introduce an actual television set. If so, then I sincerely hope Apple will offer the exact same functionality to us current Apple TV owners. Sure, we won't have an all-in-one solution with a big Apple logo on the television itself. So what?! But I would be really disappointed if the current Apple TV will be left behind once this mythical television is available.

 

[The Tech Fish]

...people replace TVs on average every 10-15 years.

Whilst I would agree that TV product replacement cycles are longer than, say the iPhones, I would not put them in 10-15 years. I would say that someone who replaces their TV every 10 years is slow on the times. Personally i would put TV product cycles at about 4-6 years (on average), which is slightly more than the average computer cycle. (2-5 years is my guess).

My view on the 'Apple TV' is that apple will be angling more for getting the unit into as many people's houses as possible, and then be the ones that you get your content from, either directly or indirectly (ie Netflix) but taking their cut on the way. Ok they won't be selling everyone a new one every year or two like they do with iPhones, but they will be taking their cut every time you buy content for your TV. If anything, I would say it's people like Sky and Virgin Media (Or the cable companies in the USA) that should be worried.

 

[milo]

"Underestimating" is a bad way to describe it since it means estimating wrong. Since this hasn't happened yet, it's entirely possible that most of the other "experts" are overestimating Apple's impact in the TV market and Samsung is estimating it just right. We won't know until it actually ships.

 

[lilo777]

Steve Jobs said: "One of the things I've always found is you've got to start with the customer experience and work backwards to the technology. You can't start with the technology and try to figure out where you're going to try to sell it."

Picture quality is great. All the technology your 10,000 R&D engineers are coming with is great, no doubt. But Apple excels at the customer experience. And if your customer experience sucks, Apple will probably beat you.

Have you ever read anyone complaining about customer experience with, say, Samsung TVs? The only problem that people have is the need to use two or more different boxes (at lest a set top box and a TV). Apple can't solve this problem. Eventually Internet will probably help but then every manufacturer will be able to benefit from it.

 

[marcusj0015]

First off, the Apple set will be more than just a television, it will likely be running iOS, and hopefully have apps, etc. Second, for anyone who is willing to adopt a new product, the price will be more-or-less meaningless. 7 years ago I paid $1400 for a 26" LCD Samsung. It's still going strong. I would pay that again for a TV that does more than just plug in to someone else's content provider (cable). I turned off my cable over a year ago, and I'm never looking back. There are too many easy and cheap services available to catch the shows I want to watch. Even commercial ads are waning in my house (YouTube & Hulu are the exceptions).

The question tho, is which apps would be best for only TV?

and this reminds me, Apple may enter the gaming market with a TV Set.

----------

"Underestimating" is a bad way to describe it since it means estimating wrong. Since this hasn't happened yet, it's entirely possible that most of the other "experts" are overestimating Apple's impact in the TV market and Samsung is estimating it just right. We won't know until it actually ships.

The simpler answer is usually right, in this case, Samsung is probably underestimating Apple, instead of everyone else overestimating Apple. and that's not looking at Apples track record, which tells the same tale.

 

[pmau]

This is a bit simplified but:
Apple's supply chain gives it 3-5% savings compared to competitors
Majority of apple TVs will be sold through apple own retail channel another 10-15% saved
Apple does not operate on borrowed capital so another 3-5% saved
Apple can purchase parts prepaying for year+ in advance another 5%
So at a price when sammy would make 0 apple will make 21%-30%
This does not account for content revenue
This does not account for Apple's ability to charge a premium even if it will be modest 10%

Don't understand why people would vote that down.

Apple could even sell the TV for less than Samsung and still make a profit.
I own a D8090 but I tell you: It's a great TV but overprized. Samsung needs to sell their SmartHub and InternetTV as premium, while Apple automatically sells you the whole iOS ecosystem.

But why sell a TV? Apple could aswell improve the ATV2 with storage and Apps, including Safari and YouTube.

 

[glxyjones]

The seperator could be Siri.

Asking your TV to look up a random fact or video on the internet in the middle of watching a show and not having to change inputs could be awesome.

Being a sports fan I imagine watching the game with a few buddies, getting into a debate about how many touchdowns some guy had, saying something like "Siri, how many touchdowns did David Jones have last year?" and immediately having the answer. Then switching right back to the game. Or better yet, an ultra-wide TV (like vizio is planning) that doesn't interrupt the viewing.

The possibilty of having tv with zero inputs besides power might be a game changer (if Apple has gotten around or agreed with cable providers).

 

[samcraig]

Sensationalist headline.

And I agree for the most part. When I am watching a movie (rarely tv) it's is 100 percent about picture quality. The fact as to whether or not my tv has apps, etc is barely a 2nd thought. My (note the word MY) use case for my tv is basically a monitor. The fact that it has other features is great - but I rarely use them.

I turn my TV on and then either play a blu-ray, stream via Apple TV or occasionally watch TV.

Sure something integrated might be nice... but really (for me) not a big deal. I also have no desire to talk to my TV

 

[Judas1]

Television manufacturers don't have much to worry about. The television market is so saturated that even great television deals are hard to sell. Everybody that wants an hdtv has one, or even several. Myself, I still have an old crt tv. Not because hdtvs aren't great and that I don't want one, its just that these TV's seem to last forever, and I don't want to throw it out. Between people like me, and people with several sets of hdtvs, who' gonna buy an Apple tv with a premium?

 

[Nunyabinez]

Given that I doubt they will get access to plasma or OLED panels, they WILL be low end.

I spit my sandwich out I laughed so hard at your statement! Yeah, Apple has no clout with anybody who would make quality display panels. You kidder you...

 

[AEMV]

Picture Quality????

It is all about User Experience, User Interface, how you access the content, ease of use and simplicity.

Most people could care less about picture quality as long as it says 1080p. Either way, coming from Apple, I am sure picture quality will be extremely competitive anyway.

I think Samsung and the rest of the industry has a lot to fear from Apple. Every single TV i have used is just a piece of crap when it comes to usability. Thats were Apple will innovate if it ever enters the TV market.

 

[D.T.]

I'd like to add to this that for high quality gear today TV smartness is absolutely irrelevant. TV sets simply serve as monitors connected to A/V receiver via HDMI. All smartness should be connected to A/V receiver and not the TV. I do not want to listen to crappy 1.5W speakers on Apple TV.

I _kind_ of agree, though I actually think it’s more that the integrated features are pretty poorly implemented vs. most of the external solutions (STBs, Media boxes, PS3, Apple TV, etc.). The apps in our Panasonic plasma are sad (we only occasionally fire up Amazon VOD since it’s not in any of the external appliances).

The major manufacturers constantly carp about their “smart” features, though I don’t know how much of a selling point that is with consumers[?]

As far as connectivity, I’d be surprised if Apple didn’t supply HDMI which would solve other boxes using the Apple TV (and output via ARC).

 

[MMbassist]

I have a Samsung 55" LED Smart TV, and I have yet to see a better picture than it has on any HD TV that anyone I know has. I paid $1500 for it at Best Buy two weeks ago. I think Apple could make a great TV, but not at a price that compete with that. They're just to proud of the products.

 

[pmau]

Picture Quality????

It is all about User Experience, User Interface, how you access the content, ease of use and simplicity.

Most people could care less about picture quality as long as it says 1080p.

Absolutely agreed. Most people don't even know or care that the content they are watching is not HD at all.

I also arguing for the experience, not the package. Meaning I don't know why Apple would need to put their view of a user experience inside a TV set...

 

[handsome pete]

film is still king in picture quality, yet, almost everybody owns a digital point-and-shoot camera. even amateurs and some pros have ditched film for convenience

That's debatable. Today's current crop of DSLRs offer some advantages over film.

I don't care so much for an Apple TV, as in, a television set made by Apple. But I do care for the Apple TV as a set-top box, the one they sell now. Let's say that Apple does indeed, as is widely predicted and even expected by now, introduce an actual television set. If so, then I sincerely hope Apple will offer the exact same functionality to us current Apple TV owners. Sure, we won't have an all-in-one solution with a big Apple logo on the television itself. So what?! But I would be really disappointed if the current Apple TV will be left behind once this mythical television is available.

Completely agree. I'm of the mindset that Jobs was talking about content delivery when he said he "cracked it." I don't really see the point in an actual Apple television panel. It seems to make more sense to run apps, programming, etc. through a box like the current Apple TV since an actual display is something people don't replace/upgrade as frequently. There really aren't many huge advances to be made on the display technology. Sure, we have OLED and can always increase resolution, but I think we'd be better off still having that option. I'm fine with them getting into the display business, but hope the content acquisition part of it stays modular.

 

[pmau]

I honestly believe that most people who vote down posts do not read them at all ... Anyways, have fun.

I did not intend to badmouth Apple, just that I don't understand why they have to build a TV to prove they can provide a great user experience... What's so hard to understand?

 

[Otto J]

Thinking that you need 10.000 developers to develop the best picture quality is basically where Samsung misses the point most. Too many chefs... There is plenty of potential for major improvements in picture quality, simply by doing things right. And that doesn't require 10.000 engineers, that basically requires one guy who knows what he's doing.

Most of Samsung's engineers are developing ways to cover up what they got wrong, which causes new issues that you need to cover up, etc etc. Seriously - people keep saying that Apple don't have the know-how to make a TV with a great picture - but hey, most of the material that's going to be shown on those tv's, were made on Apple hardware and software. The fact that they haven't put their know-how in actual use in a product that you can go out and buy, doesn't mean that Apple don't know how to create a magnificent picture.

It's really very, very simple: Buy a quality panel. Follow the standards that programmers use when creating the programs. Use an auto-sensor that actually works, using the experience from the iPhone, so that this accurate picture is actually obtained in people's living rooms - aaand... you're done. Upside to this approach - you don't need no frickin' contrast control, let alone the other 178 picture controls that Samsung leaves you with. The simplistic approach, done right, is what will ultimately deliver the best picture (ask any picture quality expert, and he'll tell you to turn most of the processing in your tv off). Simplistic, done right - does that sound like Apple to you?

I fully expect Apple to kill the competition wrt picture quality, without even breaking a sweat.

 

[ClintonS]

Samsung Are Underestimating Apple

So Apple dont need a team of 10,000 to come up with this! they already have it! its the 27" iMac scalled up to 50" then you have an IPS screen with superiour image quality to anything in Samsungs arsenal and a masive amount of processing power to do all the SMART stuff.

Samsung should be conserend as Apple have the know how to build an Interface and ECO system to beat them in every area!

 

[Nunyabinez]

I am hoping that the Apple TV will be just like the iPod and iPhone were. It wasn't that they had the best specs, it was because there was an ecosystem supporting them. If an Apple TV makes it possible for you to dump your cable company, put your game console in the closet, and integrate all your other devices with it, does that not seem worth a premium? And would you rather stay with a superior screen if you had to keep paying for hundreds of channels that you did not want? Apparently, some of you would, but I would sacrifice picture quality for the chance to get rid of Comcast.

I too hope that Apple offers both a full TV and an upgraded version of the current Apple TV2. But I think the revolution is not going to be putting Siri and iOS into a TV, there is going to be something that makes the whole experience of consuming entertainment completely different. Then these statements about "it's all picture quality" will ring hollow.

 

[striker33]

Panasonic beat Samsung year in year out and have done since the incarnation of Plasma TVs.

The love talking crap it seems.