Steve Jobs Planned to Work on Apple TV Set After Stepping Down as Apple CEO

[2010mini]

Steve would have made the deals and got everyone to participate. The music business didn't go along with Apple because it was Apple, Jobs' salesman ship and passion sold it in the end. Tim Cook just doesn't have the magic and that is why Apple is not anything special right now. Without Steve they are just riding the success train and at some point, it will run out of track.

I think all you SJ fan boys have lost your minds. Or have very short memories.

The music industry was in shambles when SJ approached them about iTunes. The needed Apple at that time. By contrast, the TV/movie industry is very strong. THEY DON'T NEED APPLE... they are currently making money hand over fist.

 

[Rogifan]

And here come all the kool-aid drinkers saying Steve Jobs would have reinvented TV because he was God and could do anything. Yet I seem to remember a few years ago when there were rumors of Apple having a TV set in the design lab everyone was saying it was a stupid idea because TVs are a low margin business and don't get replaced often and where would they store them at Applr stores, etc. Now it was a good idea because Steve was behind it?

 

[ErikGrim]

People have just latched on to the "I solved it" quote from Isaacson and assigned it mythical status because it was the only time Steve was open about things in the pipeline and because he said it so close to his death.

And now because it didn't pan out the way people imagined it there's disappointment, rationalisation and endless bounds for speculation

 

[teknikal90]

The current problem is that unbundled means you'd pay a lot more per channel. Some years ago when I worked in the cable industry (it's only gotten more expensive now) it would have been around $20/month for ESPN alone (the most in demand channel.

Without bundled subscriptions most channels will die. There simply aren't enough people to subscribe to them to keep the lights on. Additionally, many that people watch would also die as you might watch one if it's part of your bundle but you wouldn't bother paying $5/month for it on its own.

It'll be interesting to see what happens. I'm not saying it's impossible to un-bundle services but most of the channels that exist today will go away. Then we may see those that survive raise their prices as with fewer choices you have less options for where to turn for decent content.

I get that but if they can't add value to me and are only surviving due to the value added by another channel that they happen to be bundled in...then that channel doesn't need to survive. in my mind that's inefficiency. I'd rather pay $20/month for ESPN than pay $100/month...$10 of which goes to ESPN.

I get what you're saying though, the prospect of having less competition is always scary.
[doublepost=1472684325][/doublepost]

And here come all the kool-aid drinkers saying Steve Jobs would have reinvented TV because he was God and could do anything. Yet I seem to remember a few years ago when there were rumors of Apple having a TV set in the design lab everyone was saying it was a stupid idea because TVs are a low margin business and don't get replaced often and where would they store them at Applr stores, etc. Now it was a good idea because Steve was behind it?

the phone was a low margin market once when the telcos controlled design, marketing and distribution. In fact you see it in Android today. And yet there's iPhone.

 

[Juicy Box]

Just curious... how much is the TV portion of people's cable bills already?

Most cable companies have special deals when you bundle Internet with TV channels and phone service. And sometimes it's actually cheaper to get Internet and TV than to get Internet alone.

Are the channels you get now around $30 to $40 a month already?

It wouldn't make much sense to drop the TV channels from your bill... and then replace it with another set of channels if it costs more.

I get the point of dropping channels to shrink your cable bill. But then you replace it with $40 a month from someone else?

Also... you don't have to get the ultra-mega 900 channel package from your cable company. Most cable companies offer various tiers. Expanded cable is roughly 70 channels. That covers most of TV.

If you're paying for 900 channels... that's your own fault.

This was talked about a lot during the peak of the rumors of Apple's TV service.

One thing that many people do not consider is the rental cost of equipment from the cable companies.

These costs could easily be over $30 a month for a medium size family.

If you want multiple STBs and HD, plan on spending big. Well over the cost of what Apple was rumored to charge.

Plus, what if the subscription would include all past shows/seasons from participating networks? It would be well worth the $30 a month imo.

 

[Nanotyrns]

I embrace the comments that I'm silly.. But sometimes I really get sad that he's not here anymore. I really believe it would've made a huge difference. And boy, waiting for a keynote he's about to present was so exciting every single time Well..

Agreed. I never like to engage in "Steve Jobs would not have done this or that or hated whatever" but I do miss having three major events each year and I honestly believe he was the driving force behind that concept.

I also like to think that at the time all of these companies believed they could crack tv by making a tv but what they learned is that making that hardware "affordable" would be a nightmare. It's far easier to make a device that attaches to a tv, far easier to support it and far easier to control the hardware/affordability. Apple never shies away from such obstacles but there is a big difference between making the most awesome tv ever and then getting people to invest in it.

 

[HiVolt]

Maybe Steve "cracked it" as an idea and an all in one seamless platform, but that doesn't mean he would have secured the necessary distribution deals with the networks. They like their antiquated model and are gonna drop dead before they give that up.

 

[Cineplex]

I think all you SJ fan boys have lost your minds. Or have very short memories.

The music industry was in shambles when SJ approached them about iTunes. The needed Apple at that time. By contrast, the TV/movie industry is very strong. THEY DON'T NEED APPLE... they are currently making money hand over fist.

LOL! Okay. I think it is you that has forgotten. The music industry did NOT want to be involved in digital music. Steve got them involved and with the iPod got everyone onboard. Napster had left a bad taste in their mouths. The music industry would have been just as happy to keep selling CDs and invest in DRM for them.

But keep believing your twisted idea of history if it allows you to feel supirior to the "steve jobs fanboys" on the internets.

 

[Soccertess]

This is so sad to read because you know he really would have revolutionized TV. Steve wasn't perfect and his biggest mistake was lame duck Tim Cook.

I don't think Apple will ever have a revolutionary product under his leadership, he just doesn't have it!

Apple TV is a perfect example.. years without an update and still feels like it doesn't know where it's going.

Rest in peace Steve.

 

[skinned66]

Too bad. Maybe he would have made something great out of it.

 

[Michael Scrip]

This was talked about a lot during the peak of the rumors of Apple's TV service.

One thing that many people do not consider is the rental cost of equipment from the cable companies.

These costs could easily be over $30 a month for a medium size family.

If you want multiple STBs and HD, plan on spending big. Well over the cost of what Apple was rumored to charge.

Oh yeah... rental equipment can sure add up. That's why I asked what exactly people are paying and what they are getting.

It's tough to make any kind of comparison without solid numbers.

All I know is... Internet is now the most important part of your cable bill. TV is secondary. So you might be able to get a lot of TV channels for not much money. Cable companies don't want to lose TV subscribers... so they will make it attractive.

Remember when you picked how many cellphone minutes you wanted and data was secondary? Now it's reversed. Minutes are now so devalued that everyone just gets them... and it's data that is what your bill is based on.

I can imagine a similar situation happening with cable. TV is just included. You're seeing that already with Internet/TV bundles.

Sometimes it's actually cheaper to get Internet and TV... than to just get Internet.

Plus, what if the subscription would include all past shows/seasons from participating networks? It would be well worth the $30 a month imo.

That's honesty the way all TV should be

People say they want to be able choose the "channels" they want. I'm guessing that means "live channels"

What they really want is to be able to choose ANY episode of ANY show imaginable... when they want to watch it.

The concept of "linear TV" is rather outdated in this on-demand world. Well... except for sports!

 

[2010mini]

LOL! Okay. I think it is you that has forgotten. The music industry did NOT want to be involved in digital music. Steve got them involved and with the iPod got everyone onboard. Napster had left a bad taste in their mouths. The music industry would have been just as happy to keep selling CDs and invest in DRM for them.

But keep believing your twisted idea of history if it allows you to feel supirior to the "steve jobs fanboys" on the internets.

Napster was killing the music industry. And not wanting to break up albums and sell songs individually was a major part of why Napster was so popular. When SJ approached them, he knew they had no other choice. It was either stay the course and keep loosing money or beat Napster by having a legal alternative.

Like I said the music industry NEEDED Apple. But the TV/movie industry does not need Apple today. And that is the difference.

The studios/networks created UV consortium (DECE) just so Apple could not do to them what they did to the music industry.

So anyone who think SJ could just waltz in and get the tv/movie industry to do things his way is dreaming.

 

[_mdavenport]

I don't think it was about margins, but rather the complexities of global distribution and compatibility. He didn't want to go into the mobile phone market for similar reasons, but did.

Found it: http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-no-television-2014-3

"'TV is a terrible business. They don't turn over and the margins suck,' said Jobs."

Global compatibility could have been a factor as well.

 

[tennisproha]

All jokes aside Apple Tv hasn't lived up to the quality that is expected of an apple product.

So much potential yet so fail.

What else should it do?

 

[smoledman]

I think people assign mythical status to Jobs saying "I cracked it". He may not even have envisioned the Apple TV as it currently stands.

 

[TRSmudge]

I waited and waited for Apple to beef up the offerings on ATV. I have 3 of the new ones in my house and have had the older versions as well. I honestly think Sony cracked it, PS Vue got me to finally cut cable. I pay $60 a month for internet, which is fast at 65mbps. But now I added PS Vue which is only $35 for 70 stations. Add in HBO and Netflix and I'm around $60, and Im already a Prime member so I get that too. I haven't missed anything, and thats much better than the $120 I was paying for cable. Love the service so far, the unlimited DVR function in the Cloud is sweet. If Apple can't crack it, it would be nice for them to get the PS Vue App on ATV like the Sling App is. Tried Sling, horrible streaming even with my service.

 

[Mactendo]

It could be something like iPhone was for smartphones but we will never see it...
Thank you, Tim.

 

[Cineplex]

Napster was killing the music industry. And not wanting to break up albums and sell songs individually was a major part of why Napster was so popular. When SJ approached them, he knew they had no other choice. It was either stay the course and keep loosing money or beat Napster by having a legal alternative.

Like I said the music industry NEEDED Apple. But the TV/movie industry does not need Apple today. And that is the difference.

The studios/networks created UV consortium (DECE) just so Apple could not do to them what they did to the music industry.

So anyone who think SJ could just waltz in and get the tv/movie industry to do things his way is dreaming.

Napster shutdown in 2001. iTunes store launched in 2003. Napster really wasn't a threat....actually weren't a threat at all. Apple did a lot of work to convince the industry to sign on. Nobody there wanted to sign up with Apple. The industry was very anti digital, especially after WINNING the fight with Napster. The music industry was far from jumping at the chance to give Apple most of their profit. I remember these times very well.

 

[firewood]

The music industry was in shambles when SJ approached them about iTunes. The needed Apple at that time. By contrast, the TV/... industry is very strong. THEY DON'T NEED APPLE... they are currently making money hand over fist.

The TV industry is currently making money, yes, from a rapidly aging and shrinking demographic. The old people will eventually die. And the kids are taking their eyeballs and cash mostly elsewhere (torrent downloads, etc.). How long will the TV industry wait before they see the shambles as well?

Don't think you are going to convince people to replace TV's every 2-3 years.

Even if some TV vendor could, there's almost no money in that. The profit margin on TV's is way too low (look at what happened to Sony.) Instead, think of monthly recurring cash flows: tvOS in-app purchases, subscriptions, upgrade iCloud storage of selfie/cat video's. It's so simple to just ask Siri to take more out of your ApplePay-linked account every month, ad-infinitum. That's where the money with decent profit margins is.

 

[Loge]

Napster shutdown in 2001. iTunes store launched in 2003. Napster really wasn't a threat....actually weren't a threat at all. Apple did a lot of work to convince the industry to sign on. Nobody there wanted to sign up with Apple. The industry was very anti digital, especially after WINNING the fight with Napster. The music industry was far from jumping at the chance to give Apple most of their profit. I remember these times very well.

Hardly a win; Napster closed, but there were lots of other sources of illegal downloads, in many different territories; that problem certainly did not go away. In the meantime the record industry was responding by trying to add ill-conceived DRM schemes to CDs. Yes, they had to be dragged kicking and screaming into digital download sales, but they were hardly in a good place.

 

[cube]

You are correct! We don't need duplicates of useless electronics & software in our TVs. The software becomes obsolete and useless anyway, because TVs are kept much longer than BluRay players, TiVos, Apple TVs, Firesticks, etc.

I was actually thinking about tuners and speakers in my case. I do use the Netflix and YouTube apps on my TV.

 

[Waxhead138]

Finally cracked it...

Maybe Seve did, but he couldn't pass the magic on, I'm afraid.

I bet he did....biggest question is whether it would have seen the light of day. I think the same snags would have come when negotiating streaming rights from traditional network owners.

 

[citysnaps]

I think all you SJ fan boys have lost your minds. Or have very short memories.

The music industry was in shambles when SJ approached them about iTunes. The needed Apple at that time. By contrast, the TV/movie industry is very strong. THEY DON'T NEED APPLE... they are currently making money hand over fist.

Damn, you beat me to it. Could not have stated this any better.

Jobs would have faced the same resistance, and ultimately little success.

 

[profets]

I've heard Mossberg tell this story before. Unfortunately there's not much to hear from it besides Steve feeling that he cracked the TV.

From here all we can really do is speculate. Maybe he cracked the UI, maybe the service or product that he wanted to sell. We'll never know.

I think what we likely know however, is that anything Steve was working on before he passed away would have been left with someone or some group of execs at Apple. I mean, i can't imagine he had good ideas but didn't pass them on. I imagine he left a lot of thoughts and product ideas with the execs near the end.

 

[Tech198]

and then...we have today's Apple TV

Yep...

Tim probably realized that there was no way to secure TV deals with copyright holders, at least not a full line up...
We instead got a much better, "pick and choose" app by app (network) basis (reduced content, but i'm not worrying)

Better than nothing.

There is one thing: How can u get a more simpler interface than the Apple TV ?

I dunno what that thing with iCloud would have been, but I would have liked to see what's different