Steve Jobs on an Apple Television: No Need for 'All These Complicated Remote Controls'

[furqan8421]

Because that just gives you the same crap, hardly even evolutionary. I'm sorry but you don't get it. Jobs was about large evolutionary steps if not revolutionary. You seem to want to keep status-quo.

----------



WHole point of this tv is to remove all said "different boxes". Just stop and think about it. A TV that would NEVER need anything attached other than ethernet.

That won't work unless you only want all apple products. I have a ps3/wii others have DVD players. Say what you want about blu-ray but there is no streaming service that offers close to the quality that you can get on a disc right now. music is different because most people converted CD's to mp3 anyways so it was no different.

Streaming TV still has poor quality. People still own xbox/nintendo/etc and that won't be changing

 

[nagromme]

My iMac IS my TV, and my Apple Remote (the only remote I need) makes me SO glad I don’t have the pile of typewriters most people seem to think is necessary for consuming video!

That won't work unless you only want all apple products. I have a ps3/wii others have DVD players. Say what you want about blu-ray but there is no streaming service that offers close to the quality that you can get on a disc right now. music is different because most people converted CD's to mp3 anyways so it was no different.

Streaming TV still has poor quality. People still own xbox/nintendo/etc and that won't be changing

A lot of people don’t seek to have a hodgepodge of different brands in their living room, it just kind of happened! They would be OK if it were just Apple, as long as they got what they DO care about: the content. People who demand a non-Apple game system, and whatever else, still exist for sure—and they can’t simplify down to one Apple device, you’re right. But lots of other people, though, can! And that number would grow over time, not shrink.

I’m one of them; granted. Granted, my iMac has a USB-stick DVR because I still watch TV on rabbit-ears. But I wouldn’t be sorry to put that behind me! Always be careful about saying something "won’t be changing” Even when it comes to HD streaming.

 

[drewyboy]

So Apple is planning on giving me Blu-ray, PS3, Xbox360, a complete 7.1 DTS sound receiver with speaker hook-ups and HDMI switching in their Apple TV set ?

Talk about a nightmare... having to upgrade this 3000$ TV each time I wanted to upgrade one part of the setup.

Their "dream" would be no blu-ray... stream it via iTunes store. As far as gaming, sure you COULD plug in your ps3/xbox/etc or use your iphone/ipod/ipad, which will inevitably actually have decent games (a ways off yes). But imagine that to play a FPS multiplayer game, your friends just bring their phones, you have the app on the tv and you're ready to go. As far as audio, yeah i'm sure there will be optical out, but again, another remote.

I'm not trying to say "please oh holy steve give us and I will take anything!". I'm just saying, that's probably the ideal vision of the tv from apple, remember ecosystem.

 

[ThanksSteve]

I'd love to see a Siri voice-controlled television instead of a remote.

 

[longofest]

Didn't Steve know about HDMI Control? My equipment can talk to each other so I need to use one controller for day-to-day use. It even controls my PS3 (works in-game too).

I think Steve's point is that you still have to use a sucky remote - even if it's just one remote. In his view, it should have a minimal amount of buttons.

 

[Yellowstone2012]

Well, maybe the remote control is Siri-enabled. A simple remote control where all you do press the "speak" button and say what you want the TV to do. Maybe the remote will even be something like the Wii Remote.

Imagine playing a Wii style version of Angry Birds, but with Apple's technology.

 

[Khashoggi]

My $0.02 -

There will be a small remote, similar to the current Apple Tv remote with a Siri button on it. Push and speak and the remote transfers it to the Apple Tv which sends it up to the cloud for processing.

It won't be dumbed down to just changing channel. You will be able to say, "I want to see the latest episode of The Office" and it will just start playing...

 

[RizziNUp]

What's complicated with pressing a power button the changing the channel or the volume. Talking to your t.v is dumb. "Change channel" "The increase volume" "The go to channel 34". What a joke.

Besides to the person above there would be a remote with athe button to let siri know when to listen.

You're thinking about it all wrong. If you think solely within the parameters of how we currently act with our TV, then, yes, it may seem silly.

Think face/movement recognition (xbox kinect) paired with voice recognition. Add in Siri, with her ability to understand what you say. For example:

You walk into your bedroom with an Apple Television set. Siri recognizes your face and instantly starts listening. As a second confirmation (or first, if you weren't facing the TV), she recognizes your voice as you say "Let's watch Survivor from last night". "Absolutely, RizziNUp!", and the show begins.

Any recording command, or On Demand functions are simple then.

"Show me all new videos that came out this week"

"Record all new episodes of Game of Thrones"

"Delete everything I've already seen before October"


Where I am stumped is with pause, rewind, and fast forward. Maybe placing your palm in the air might pause, then your voice could do the rest...? Some food for though I guess.

 

[something3153]

Remember when all the car manufacturers thought that cars talking to you was a great idea? "Door is ajar, door is ajar, door is ajar". Yeah.

 

[daytonlowell]

The downside with a Siri-enabled TV set is that it would need to be smart enough to realize when you are just talking while the show is going so that it will not do any unexpected commands. I'd also imagine that you'd need a quiet room in order to speak to the TV set. Even with dual-noise canceling microphones it would still be strained.

I'm guessing that Siri wouldn't be the only way to control it. I'm guessing it would come with a remote very similar to the one that ships with the current Apple TV and of course you'd still be able to use your iOS device as a remote. I'm guessing a button on remote it comes with would need to be pressed to activate Siri.

 

[ABernardoJr]

If Apple got into photography... That'd be awesome. I hope that still comes around sometime soon

 

[mdriftmeyer]

So Apple is planning on giving me Blu-ray, PS3, Xbox360, a complete 7.1 DTS sound receiver with speaker hook-ups and HDMI switching in their Apple TV set ?

Talk about a nightmare... having to upgrade this 3000$ TV each time I wanted to upgrade one part of the setup.

Game Consoles have nothing to do with HDTV.

 

[KnightWRX]

use your iphone/ipod/ipad, which will inevitably actually have decent games (a ways off yes). But imagine that to play a FPS multiplayer game, your friends just bring their phones, you have the app on the tv and you're ready to go.

Touch screens make for crappy controllers. I like looking at the actual TV when playing games on my PS3, not having to look at the controller all the time.

As for their dreams for Blu-ray, they can shove 'em whereever, I happen to love the quality and convenience of disc based media for movies.

I'm not trying to say "please oh holy steve give us and I will take anything!". I'm just saying, that's probably the ideal vision of the tv from apple, remember ecosystem.

Then it's a vision that will relegate it to hobby status yet again. Again, "single remote" is not a problem TVs have, it's a problem complex setups of different boxes have. Either they have an all-in-one solution to "solve" the problem (which brings its own problems, ie, upgrading a single component) or they don't actually solve the "single remote" problem at all.

And frankly, Apple doesn't need to make a TV for that.

 

[shingi70]

Agree with him on all fronts. I'm in the Xbox 360 new Metro dashboard beta and its great. I can control the entire OS and apps. The Next update should be adding youtube and the ability to use the Xbox as a Set top box. I don't have one but there is also a WP7 remote app that allows me to control the xbox from their.

Now to see what apple does.

 

[flash84x]

What's complicated with pressing a power button the changing the channel or the volume. Talking to your t.v is dumb. "Change channel" "The increase volume" "The go to channel 34". What a joke.

Besides to the person above there would be a remote with athe button to let siri know when to listen.

You're thinking of it the way it already is, think outside the box. You wont tell your TV to go to channel 34. You will tell your TV "pickup where i left off with Breaking Bad", "what's going on in the news today", "record the Bears game for me this week", "show me the best action movie that was just released"

 

[KnightWRX]

Game Consoles have nothing to do with HDTV.

Then where are all the "multiple complicated remotes" from ? My TV has 1 remote, and it's quite the simple one too (channel up/down, volume up/down, power, input and a numerical pad).

 

[s8film40]

I think people are missing the point with a Siri enabled TV. It's not about talking the actions you would use on your remote to the TV (Channel up/down, etc.) it's about simply telling your TV what you want to watch and then it finding it for you and playing it.

 

[abbstrack]

blanket statement time

kind of goes to the heart of how i feel about apple vs. amazon vs. google.

Apple (at least the steve jobs version) tries to change lives in terms of how we interact with technology

I get the feeling that the kindle fire, and these other android powered device (both tablet and phones) are more about market share and consumption.

not to say apple is disinterested in either things, but i still feel at the heart of their design efforts is a genuine interest in transforming the way we live our lives. and it's evidenced by the numerous ways their devices/products are being used outside of the consumptive sphere.

I wouldn't put Google as a company in the strictly consumptive category, but I would put their Android ambitions there.

 

[drewyboy]

Then it's a vision that will relegate it to hobby status yet again. Again, "single remote" is not a problem TVs have, it's a problem complex setups of different boxes have. Either they have an all-in-one solution to "solve" the problem (which brings its own problems, ie, upgrading a single component) or they don't actually solve the "single remote" problem at all.

And frankly, Apple doesn't need to make a TV for that.

You're talking about a company that designs hardware and codes an OS. That my friend is a "complex setup". We'll just have to agree to disagree on it. They'll come out w/ it and ppl will be able to dive in as far as they want.

 

[Peace]

All this talk about "Siri I want to watch (insert name of show ) From yesterday or last week.

The only major problem with that is a vast majority of television viewership likes to watch LIVE television.

Live television is the bread and butter for the studios and networks. They need that commercial money.

Take commercials out of the equation and you have a losing product.

 

[Infrared]

And for the people that have no mouths ... ?

 

[ivladster]

What's complicated with pressing a power button the changing the channel or the volume. Talking to your t.v is dumb. "Change channel" "The increase volume" "The go to channel 34". What a joke.

Besides to the person above there would be a remote with athe button to let siri know when to listen.

Yeah but that's not all you do with a remote. Try switching from TV to Xbox then turning on sound system to that same line. Oh don't forget to turn off sound on tv, because it give echo. That's what Steve meant and I don't think he meant that everything you need to do on tv has to be commanded with voice. Apple will make something that will do things on its own. There has to be a camera in TV for facetime, but that camera can also be used to see how far you're sitting from the tv and automatically adjusts volume.

Maybe it's a joke for you because you can't imagine what can be done, but i would trade it for all 5 remotes I have on my coffee table.

 

[Ziger Woods]

Or

The downside with a Siri-enabled TV set is that it would need to be smart enough to realize when you are just talking while the show is going so that it will not do any unexpected commands. I'd also imagine that you'd need a quiet room in order to speak to the TV set. Even with dual-noise canceling microphones it would still be strained.

Or you could just say Siri and then any command after that so it know when to listen!?

 

[KnightWRX]

I think people are missing the point with a Siri enabled TV. It's not about talking the actions you would use on your remote to the TV (Channel up/down, etc.) it's about simply telling your TV what you want to watch and then it finding it for you and playing it.

A voice enabled TV guide search function. That has nothing to do with "All these complicated remotes" and it could be implemented in a 99$ Apple TV box instead of a 2000$ Apple TV set.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

I don't know why, but thinking of a Siri-enabled TV set reminds me of Captain Picard.

Engage!

Seriously though, speaking to a phone in public is one thing, but telling you TV what to do? With a remote you always know that pressing a button will perform the desired reaction, but voice recognition is still unpredictable. What if you want to operate the TV silently? You're going to sound ridiculous telling Siri how to increase or lower the volume.

Obviously the iOS devices will act as a secondary remote through a dedicated App, but not everyone is going to own one of those devices. Whats more, it would likely waste battery!