Apple pretty much has to offer super resolution. And it will be thinner! What else can they do assuming the use of rigid glass, that would make a conventional TV more compelling than the excellent and quite nice looking TVs in stores now? Apps...not that compelling for most people on a family TV where people want to watch their favorite shows.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Smart TV Adoption Growing Rapidly, Market Ripe for Apple iTV
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I just got a new 2013 Samsung Smart TV for the bedroom and while it's allowed me to ditch the Mac Mini I had hooked up to the old TV (I mainly use Plex), it's so easy to see how much better it could be. I never had a pre-iPhone smartphone but I bet it's a very similar situation: it does the job, but not gracefully.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
The problem isn't the TV. It's the mode in which content is provided. Cable companies need to drop the outdated system of bundling channels and let people buy what they want. There's only a dozen or so channels I would want if I had cable, not 200+. Until then I don't even care Apple or anyone else does.
Dead horse beaten.
Dead horse beaten.
One year later..............
There is just too much fluff and the costs are too high.
True, but then so was the mobile phone market.
Some of the problems with the tv industry now are the same as with the mobile market previously - ugly, sluggish interfaces; awkward input; and little or no 3rd party app content.
It's getting better, but still going from a modern smartphone/tablet to a "smart TV" feels like stepping back a few years. To me, it's incredibly ripe for a shake-up; and while many companies are technically capable of doing it, Apple is one of the few with the clout to carry it off.
No, I'd say that Cable companies must be forced to divest content so that they can't penalize people who 'cut cable'.
It's not about the GUI, or how you interact with the TV. It's about content that you want at affordable prices. Apple could revolutionize TV without coming out with any new hardware at all, if they could only figure out how to provide content that you want, when you want it - without all the other BS that you don't want. I don't subscribe to cable or satellite. Granted that my family doesn't place a whole lot of value on TV, but when we do watch it is either a few over the air channels/shows or (predominantly) streamed from Netflix or Amazon. This is a hugely complex task, riddled with legal and monetary hurdles. However, Apple is a company that has the money and intelligence to revolutionize TV.
I love my AppleTV but ... The problem with AppleTV is that (like with everything from Apple) they are very narrowminded, when it comes to Apps.
In Denmark we have Netflix, Podcast, Movies and YouTube.
But on our SmartTV's (Samsung, Philips, Toshiba and LG) we have the local Apps like ViaPlay, TV2 Play and so on... Oh and HBO Nordic.
And if Apple Cant catch up with that, the AppleTV becomes dusty.
I still watch netflix and Youtube on my AppleTV - but all my local apps I switch to the SmartHub on my Samsung TV. It has everything. Apple came first... But now they sleep and rest... Like with the iPhone. Nothing really new for years.
That's sad...
And the SmartTV reacts to ones voice and gestures ... Thats kind of cool.
In Denmark we have Netflix, Podcast, Movies and YouTube.
But on our SmartTV's (Samsung, Philips, Toshiba and LG) we have the local Apps like ViaPlay, TV2 Play and so on... Oh and HBO Nordic.
And if Apple Cant catch up with that, the AppleTV becomes dusty.
I still watch netflix and Youtube on my AppleTV - but all my local apps I switch to the SmartHub on my Samsung TV. It has everything. Apple came first... But now they sleep and rest... Like with the iPhone. Nothing really new for years.
That's sad...
And the SmartTV reacts to ones voice and gestures ... Thats kind of cool.
I have tried using mine, but it's a poor substitute for iOS/OSX (or Windows, or Android...). So I'm back to using the TV just as a 'dumb' display, and getting/browsing the content on other devices.
I think the better question to ask is what are people doing with smart tv's and what content are they accessing.
I would guess that 99% of the people who use smart tv's use it only for Netflix, Hulu and you tube. Those same apps are also availiable on every game console and other media player so why complicate things even more ?!
I have a Samsung tv and its got dozens of other apps and other than the video streaming ones, they are all horrible , slow to load and use and impossible to use GUIs. A large reason why is the cumbersome remote control, which unless you fork over an extra $100 do not include a keyboard!!! Ever Try tweeting or playing angry birds using a number pad in a non ergonomic stick remote...
I would guess that 99% of the people who use smart tv's use it only for Netflix, Hulu and you tube. Those same apps are also availiable on every game console and other media player so why complicate things even more ?!
I have a Samsung tv and its got dozens of other apps and other than the video streaming ones, they are all horrible , slow to load and use and impossible to use GUIs. A large reason why is the cumbersome remote control, which unless you fork over an extra $100 do not include a keyboard!!! Ever Try tweeting or playing angry birds using a number pad in a non ergonomic stick remote...
Its been said in pieces throughout this discussion and many like it on MR, but ask yourself this question: When was the last time you heard of a TV manufacturer ask any kind of questions about what a consumer would like in a television? Aside from general customer service and maybe some quality control questions, I'd venture to guess almost never. Even as I'm writing this, I find it hard to fathom that such a possibility even exists, because it's pretty much been an industry that gives us "evolutions" that we don't want or ask for. The last natural progression I can think of would be HDTV. That was a legitimate improvement upon an old technology.
Did any of you ever ask for 3D TV? I for one couldn't care less....but we were essentially told we wanted it. I'm sure some like it....but the way it was introduced was like...Huh? Ok....I guess I'll like it....maybe....for a minute...
Point being: Apple does in fact need to bridge the gap between content providers and consumers. Its the only link in the chain where they could really step in and introduce some innovative changes to a very well established industry that truly has no need to adapt unless it wants to.
Did any of you ever ask for 3D TV? I for one couldn't care less....but we were essentially told we wanted it. I'm sure some like it....but the way it was introduced was like...Huh? Ok....I guess I'll like it....maybe....for a minute...
Point being: Apple does in fact need to bridge the gap between content providers and consumers. Its the only link in the chain where they could really step in and introduce some innovative changes to a very well established industry that truly has no need to adapt unless it wants to.
In other news, smart car adoption is growing rapidly, and less and less people buy "regular" cars without an integrated screen with built-in software.
Surely that means Apple is preparing an iCar.
Seriously though, that's one of the most useless front-page article I've seen in a while. As people have mentionned, "Smart" TVs are just the natural evolution of regular high-end TVs and, unlike smartphones at their beginning, don't represent a class of their own.
Surely that means Apple is preparing an iCar.
Seriously though, that's one of the most useless front-page article I've seen in a while. As people have mentionned, "Smart" TVs are just the natural evolution of regular high-end TVs and, unlike smartphones at their beginning, don't represent a class of their own.
Pretty much this. It's impossible to not get a smart TV if it's bigger than a desktop monitor. I have had "Smart" TVs for about 5 years now, and I have literally never used the apps that came with the TV except once when I first got the TV (first had a Sharp, then a Panasonic, now a current-model high-end Samsung). The apps are terrible and buggy. Sure 25% "own" a SmartTV, but I bet of them, something like 90% of them have never used the apps / didn't realize they had them, 9% have used one to five times, and 1% use regularly.
The 12% apple TV/Roku/similar is more impressive, since if people have those, they know how to use them, as they specifically purchased them.
I hope TV manufacturers start making decent OSes for their TVs soon. Everything post-1080p LCD has been pointless (although the price has been dropping too, and screen refresh can be good if you want to spend serious money). I don't get this push for 3D or 4K though. 3D: no one ever uses except for movies for their kids. 4K? our eyes can literally not distinguish from 1080p at normal sitting distances / screen sizes. Can't wait for Microsoft or Apple or someone to step in and make a decent TV OS. I'm surprised Samsung hasn't, but they sure aren't even close.
E: I also have an Apple TV, which I use all the time now that video streaming works. I never use the apps on it either, though...
Smart tvs are currently garbage, slow and unresponsive, horrible ui, and don't do anything besides allow you to stream things like Netflix which things like my Xbox and 
Tv do anyway.
Tv do anyway.What's the point in 4k set up box when theirs no content in 4k? Very few people I'd say less than 1% of the people around the world have a 4k TV.
The only reason people are buying smart TV is because damn near every new TV made now has it built in. You have no choice
That also pretty much sums up the state of smartphone popularity right now. Cheap "dumbphones" are all getting replaced by cheap Android "smartphones" that people just use as dumbphones anyway. Those people did not necessarily want smartphones features in the first place.
It's just simpler and cheaper for manufacturers to put Android, which is free, on their entry level phones than to develop and maintain their own dumbphone OS. Then people notice a rise in worldwide Android marketshare and call Apple doomed.
Exactly. Which is why the market is ripe for Apple to jump in. Taking something that is fairly popular but overflowing with crappy products and making it f...ing WORK, is what has built Apple's success.
Even the arrogant competitor remarks are ready. I hear the stupidest arguments from other manufacturers why Apple won't be competitive in the TV market.
It will never be as big as the iPhone though, even if they grab a substantial market share, it's nowhere near as big a market as the smartphone market. My take is that this might be the reason why Apple could choose not to go after this market, even though they could. Same goes for the iWatch btw.
Maybe they'll re-invent the loudspeaker ;-) (No, I don't actually believe that).
Smart TV's are a bad idea in my opinion. TV's only need to be monitors. It's a fairly decent sized purchase and one I think most people do every 5-10 years or more.
What we need is the TV box that plugs into the TV like how Apple TV does. Make a box that is new and wonderful not a TV. I would like that to be a DVR, provide my menu/guide in a speedy manner with the ability to use a iOS device or external keyboard to do my navigating. All I really want is the iTunes store, DVR and to be able to access my programming guide without using a darn page up, page down button or by entering a text string search xbox console style.
What we need is the TV box that plugs into the TV like how Apple TV does. Make a box that is new and wonderful not a TV. I would like that to be a DVR, provide my menu/guide in a speedy manner with the ability to use a iOS device or external keyboard to do my navigating. All I really want is the iTunes store, DVR and to be able to access my programming guide without using a darn page up, page down button or by entering a text string search xbox console style.
My Samsung TV from 3 years ago is a "Smart TV". It's probably the dumbest thing call "Smart" I've ever seen. Nothing makes sense and it's all kludged together like a pre-iPhone "smart" Samsung phone. I guess Samsung TVs won't be really smart until they can copy Apple's smart-ness. Sorry to be a smart-ass but someone had to make a smarting post about Samsung's idea of Smart.
Smart tvs are currently garbage, slow and unresponsive, horrible ui, and don't do anything besides allow you to stream things like Netflix which things like my Xbox and
I can image such discussion in the pre-iPhone era. I can hear people like you saying: "smartphones are currently garbage. I have my iPod for playing music and my Sony PSP for games".
Things change.
That's my wishlist as well. I want to be able to buy an insanely nice TV if I want to, and not have the "smart" functionality limiting my hardware choice. Incorporating all these features into a TV prevents it's use in any serious home theater (assuming they're not going to offer ultra high end options).
I wonder if smart TV adoption is actually increasing because they are smart TVs, or if it's because, in reality, all TVs with a decent picture are smart TVs.
We just bought two new 47" TVs to mount on the wall. They are smart TVs, though we have absolutely no interest in their "smart" capabilities. Everything we looked at that was a comparable product was a smart tv. Pretty much the only TVs that remain as "just panels" are the cheap brands, and even some of those are launching smart tv hardware.
In short, I am not convinced that there is all that great a market for the smart TVs at all.
EDIT: I see this has been said already. Oh well, adding to the discourse.
----------
I agree, however I think they are now moving to an even stupider model; one where each company sells their own streaming service. We just so WB abandon Netflix for their own streaming service. There is already Hulu, Netflix, HBOgo, Showtime, now WB has a client, and maybe even something I am missing. So, rather than potentially having one venus from which we get to consume content, we may have dozens.
We just bought two new 47" TVs to mount on the wall. They are smart TVs, though we have absolutely no interest in their "smart" capabilities. Everything we looked at that was a comparable product was a smart tv. Pretty much the only TVs that remain as "just panels" are the cheap brands, and even some of those are launching smart tv hardware.
In short, I am not convinced that there is all that great a market for the smart TVs at all.
EDIT: I see this has been said already. Oh well, adding to the discourse.
----------
I agree, however I think they are now moving to an even stupider model; one where each company sells their own streaming service. We just so WB abandon Netflix for their own streaming service. There is already Hulu, Netflix, HBOgo, Showtime, now WB has a client, and maybe even something I am missing. So, rather than potentially having one venus from which we get to consume content, we may have dozens.