Steve Jobs on an Apple Television Set: 'I Finally Cracked It'

[marcusj0015]

No, there would be no blu-ray. With iCloud and iTunes moving to 1080 there would be no need. Steve Jobs was not fond of disks and cables, think wireless n and airplay in and out.

C

Awesome story bro. i don't care. i as a consumer want Blu-Ray.

 

[liavman]

TV sets complicated? That's new to me. Yes, if you have 3 pieces of equipment to start a universal remote with touch screen comes in handy. But complicated? And the remark of cable operators being in total control strikes me as odd. Apple wants to be in total control as well, and they're doing a fine job at it. It's about the business model, even more money has to be generated although I'm fathomed why. They already have so much in cash they don't know what to do with it

May be this is exactly what non apple believers said when there were rumors of iPhone about the state of the then prevailing smart phones.

 

[Maddix]

a la carte will never happen. The television and movie industry will not fall for that like the music industry did by giving so much control to Apple. Apple redefined how music was purchased, and was basically able to dictate to the industry since they had the lion's share of the market. The video industry wants to control it's content and pricing. Allowing Apple to become the main provider would upset the balance of control. That is why they make separate contracts with Amazon, Apple, Netflix and so on. No one company will get the whole pie, just parts of it. Thus in order to get all of it, the consumer would end up paying more. And that is exactly what the industry wants. So yes, cable tv may slowly fade away, but in the end, streaming will be even more expensive when that does happen. Don't wish for the demise of cable. It will cost you.

Yes, internet will get far more expensive as more & more people ditch cable & satellite. Think of it like this: Imagine if everyone suddenly only went to the gas station to buy fuel. They would have to raise the price on fuel to keep open.

 

[GenesisST]

Mactvman is obviously not an Apple product user and therefore doesn't know why people are willing to pay more, and at time a heck of a lot more, for Apple products. Ignorance is bliss, and enables one to make dumb and stupid statements without knowing it.

Well, I have the following:
2006 iMac Core Duo
2010 MBP 15" i7 hires
iPod 60GB
iPhone 3GS 16GS
iPhone 3GS 32
Apple TV
Several KB and mice bought separately
A **** load of songs from iTunes
Rented a lot on AppleTV.

And I still agree with him to **some** level. I'm still content with my 3GS, don't feel the need to upgrade yet.

I agree to pay more for a computer or for a phone. For a "pixel rendering device"? I'd rather choose my own and plug in what **I** want, which is: Bluray player, AppleTv, Xbox360.

Don't like any of my devices? You don't like bluray? Hate MS and don't want an XBOX? Boo-hoo! Plug-in your own ****ing devices and let me choose my own.

Yeah, I got up on the wrong foot...

 

[liavman]

i am a little surprised Apple hasnt developed their AppleTV line into more of a Tivo type box that can be used with cable channels. The interface is excellent on tivo, but to blend internet offerings, existing recordings, etc all together would be really nice if it had an Apple interface on top of it

Tivo is basically making an extra copy of shows you want to watch. What you choose to record is what you get. Why should Apple duplicate that?

There is a totally different model possible.

The game Apple would like to play is the 'meta data' game. Once they strike partnership arrangement with the various studios/distributors, it will just maintain 'pointers' to the content and not a copy itself, in your account. This is what they do with iTunes music. There will be a cache of some of that on the local device. That is what iCloud is. Whether the show content comes from Apple servers or content owner/distributor servers is immaterial to this architecture. This separation of data and meta-data is where Apple can add some significant value.

 

[Hikkadwa]

Apple Television?

Apple, try and get your software right first. Keynote after Lion is a complete beach ball. Yes iPhones and iPads are making you a lot of money but Keynote is a flagship presentation software which always had the edge over 'death by powerpoint"...but no longer I think!

 

[hipnetic]

I see a lot of people posting the same things over and over, many of which I addressed in previous posts, but I'll do it again.

Argument: Whether or not Apple will create a physical TV set. Why would I spend money on that when I already own an expensive TV, front projector, etc.

Response: Stop ignoring the current Apple TV (little black box). *That's* the Apple TV. It already exists! *If* Apple decides to make physical televisions, I predict that it will be running the same OS/UI as the current Apple TV box and they'll continue to sell Apple TV's alongside the physical TV's and keep the firmwares in sync. Already have a great TV? Just buy the Apple TV box. Need a new TV? Maybe you'll buy their physical TV set. Personally, I don't see them bothering making physical TVs at all.

****

Argument: Siri will be a game-changer.

Response: Again, they can already add Siri support to the existing Apple TV in the same way they give you full QWERTY keyboard support on the existing Apple TV: By way of the Remote app on the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch. And I agree that this will be a great way to control the Apple TV.

****

Argument: Apple will never get the NFL. DirecTV has a stranglehold on it.

Response: Sony already cut a deal. You can get NFL Sunday Ticket on the PS3 and not be a DirecTV subscriber. I predict Microsoft will offer it on the XBox and Apple could, if they're willing to pay enough for it, offer it on the Apple TV.

****

Argument: The networks rely on ad revenue and deals with the cable companies and will never go for a la carte pricing.

Response: There already *IS* a la carte pricing. Go to iTunes and see for yourself. You can buy TV shows individually or, slightly discounted, by the entire season of a show. Amazon also offers this. It's already here. Today. The only issues are that they don't have *every* show from every network, and the pricing isn't as good as Amazon's (last I checked). They've got enough money in the bank and a large enough iOS userbase that I'm confident that they will leverage those things to improve selection and price.

****

Argument: It won't replace my Blu-ray with 1080p/24 and 3D. Their 720p movies are over-compressed crap. I demand quality!

Response: No, it's not as good as Blu-ray, but it's not crap. It's darn good, as a matter of fact. Apple doesn't need to match Blu-ray quality, they just need to provide "good enough" HD quality, at a reasonable price, so that the masses will buy into it. Ever hear of MP3? Not as good as SACD, but the mass market has decided the convenience of MP3 combined with its "good enough" quality is worth more to them.

 

[ThanksSteve]

With so much streaming of content available via Netflix, Hulu, and elsewhere, the time is perfect to set up televisions with a connection to iCloud and with built in software that's similar to a computer. If Apple can be first to this, they'll snag the majority or the market share as they did with iPad. Hopefully, they have a team working on it as I'd like to see it done right.

I can see Google getting into this too so it will be a fight. Lots of cash to be made selling tv shows and movies direct from the tv since a lot of people would love the easy of doing it from their remote versus doing it from a computer and trying to get it on the tv. Though some cable operators already allow this.

 

[Piggie]

Response: No, it's not as good as Blu-ray, but it's not crap. It's darn good, as a matter of fact. Apple doesn't need to match Blu-ray quality, they just need to provide "good enough" HD quality, at a reasonable price, so that the masses will buy into it. Ever hear of MP3? Not as good as SACD, but the mass market has decided the convenience of MP3 combined with its "good enough" quality is worth more to them.

Hmmmm, I can see the Corporate Statement Now:

Apple: the company that makes things, good enough for you.

 

[Surf Monkey]

It would definitely be in the high-end of the market, however it wouldn't be more expensive than TVs in that range... the size of the potential TV is what I'm wondering... 1 size fits all? several sizes?

I'm not so sure about that. I suspect Apple would want to enter the TV market in the middle of the range.

 

[Rafterman]

The more I read about Steve Jobs, the sadder his death is. Its obvious he was far from done with his ideas. Jobs was still a young man and would have been at the top of his game for another 15-20 years, if it weren't for the cancer.

With all the Wall Street fat cats who do nothing but make money off of other peoples' money, Steve Jobs actually created things that people wanted and used. You can argue whether any business executive is worth 6 billion dollars, but if there is one, it would be a guy like Steve Jobs.

 

[Friscohoya]

a la carte will never happen. The television and movie industry will not fall for that like the music industry did by giving so much control to Apple. Apple redefined how music was purchased, and was basically able to dictate to the industry since they had the lion's share of the market. The video industry wants to control it's content and pricing. Allowing Apple to become the main provider would upset the balance of control. That is why they make separate contracts with Amazon, Apple, Netflix and so on. No one company will get the whole pie, just parts of it. Thus in order to get all of it, the consumer would end up paying more. And that is exactly what the industry wants. So yes, cable tv may slowly fade away, but in the end, streaming will be even more expensive when that does happen. Don't wish for the demise of cable. It will cost you.

Never is kind of a strong word. The music industry went down because people were downloading it for free so they were open to anything that avoided that. Cable is going the same way. There lots of pirate websites and services out there. Once they start going mainstream and your grandmother is doing it things will change.

 

[buxtone17]

No longer would users have to fiddle with complex remotes for DVD players and cable channels. 'It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it.'"

This is it, man. My $400 Dynex TV is so complicated. And I have to actually stand up and move around for 10 seconds to watch a movie on BluRay. It's just really frustrating how difficult and complex all of that is...

I can't wait to pay $1500 for a $1000 TV just because it has an Apple logo on it!

 

[bushido]

Argument: It won't replace my Blu-ray with 1080p/24 and 3D. Their 720p movies are over-compressed crap. I demand quality!

Response: No, it's not as good as Blu-ray, but it's not crap. It's darn good, as a matter of fact. Apple doesn't need to match Blu-ray quality, they just need to provide "good enough" HD quality, at a reasonable price, so that the masses will buy into it. Ever hear of MP3? Not as good as SACD, but the mass market has decided the convenience of MP3 combined with its "good enough" quality is worth more to them.

i pity those people that pay 17 € for a downloaded file without any special features etc when u can get the same movie on BD for less.

movie studios r just as stupid as music labels, they try to fight piracy which is useless instead of going with the times. charging more for a file than physical media which involves higher costs i assume is silly.

same as copyright protection and those warnings on their discs. thx for purchasing my product but as a thank you note i'm gonna be an ass about it and put ads and piracy warnings on it AND on top of it i tell u where u can play the file and where not.

 

[Aeolius]

This is it, man. My $400 Dynex TV is so complicated. And I have to actually stand up and move around for 10 seconds to watch a movie on BluRay.

That's nothing. When I was a kid and the youngest of three sons, I was the remote control! "Turn volume up!" "Change the channel!" "Turn off the TV!"

Let's hear it for progress!

 

[FuNGi]

Make a "SPOILER ALERT" post next to book related "rumors"

You ignore the fact that casual readers of MR (like myself) happen to land on the front page without any say in what goes on it. Now if MR had a spoiler free section like they do for keynotes you might have a valid point. But they don't. The only alternative is to not visit MR.

Enough with the spoilers about the biography, I want to read the book!

These posts should have an alert before them, so people can skip them. It seems I'm going to have to restrain myself of macrumors until I've read the book in a couple of days!

MODS: A simple tag would relieve many book enthusiasts complaints. Just saying'

 

[ramuman]

This is it, man. My $400 Dynex TV is so complicated. And I have to actually stand up and move around for 10 seconds to watch a movie on BluRay. It's just really frustrating how difficult and complex all of that is...

I can't wait to pay $1500 for a $1000 TV just because it has an Apple logo on it!

Your choice in that case would speak to your intelligence. As it would for anyone else.

 

[TheSlush]

This seems inevitable to me.

 

[louis Fashion]

power on

And what do you think all the Apple devices in the world run on, hopes and dreams? They're plugged into the same wall sockets as set top boxes.

For the record; set top boxes use more power than many other devices. Also they are on 24/7.

 

[bushido]

Also they are on 24/7.

 

[Yvan256]

Actual Apple TV? I don't think so.

Seriously, people just switched from CRT to LCD/Plasma. The display itself should be good enough for the next decade or two. It's the software that's the problem. The little black 99$ TV box fixes that.

If you think the general public will dump their current television for an actual Apple-branded television, you're dreaming. Even if they did, can you imagine the waste that would produce every time a new model would come out? If your solution is to have a "module" that plugs into the TV, well, you're back at the current TV model anyway. Seriously, it can't get much simpler than one power cable and one HDMI cable.

The TV box is all you need, the other part of the equation is getting the actual content from the producers. The problem is all the control and exclusive contracts from the networks, cable and satellite operators.

Then there's another sad part to this equation that I hope Apple are keeping in sight: download quotas from all the various ISPs. And don't tell me "just change ISP", not everyone lives in a metropolis with 15 providers. Where I live it's either Télébec or nothing. I get 35GB download+upload (combined), any more than that and it's 10$ per gigabyte.

 

[Piggie]

I agree with you.

However, I don't see anything actually wrong as such with Apple just making a TV set so they just have one (or a small range) out there.

We all know, in reality all that will happen if they will get Samsung or LG to build a TV with a little help from Johnny Ive for the styling, an Apple logo on the back, some Aluminium and Smoked glass, and a pretty remote.

Price it at say $100 more than a similar spec set from someone else and job done.
It would be simple and easy to do, and almost a no cost product, and at least they would have a TV on the market that Apple fans could choose to buy when out shopping for a minimum premium.

 

[Battlefield Fan]

they lost me when the quit tv rentals

 

[DanteMann]

Oh pleeease do bring out this new TV which will actually be an "already on the market" TV from Samsung, LG, Sharp, etc.... And please make sure it is not a rectangular shape with a bezel. THAT WOULD BE BLATANTLY COPYING. Just using the same argument you use on Samsung in the courts. Hmmm.....
Sorry Apple, you don't really make anything from the ground up, you just repackage what already exists. BTW, Samsung already have some of the best TVs out there that sync up very smoothly with their devices, so maybe you can just get them to churn out a few with your logo on it. That way you can get the sheep to buy them at 3x the price Samsung is already selling it for, and then they can also bash Samsung for not being innovative and blatant copiers.
BTW Apple, you've already tried to bite the hand the feeds you, and then came back begging to keep them as a supplier when you realized no one can do what they do best.

 

[R0bert]

Awesome story bro. i don't care. i as a consumer want Blu-Ray.

Blu-ray is a bag of hurt.